Skip to main content

Full text of "Watson's magazine [serial]"

See other formats

Watson's Ma'^azine 

Lncered as second-class macier January 4, 191 J. a( ihe ^cal Vfjce at Thomson. Georgia, 
Under the tHct of March 5, / *-^-5. 


— ; i- 

Vol. XXI. A UGU. ST, 1915 No, 4 







Published Monthly by THE JEFFERSONlAN PUBLISHING COMPANY. / nson, Ga. 






Sold in France as the Best One-Volume 

Life of the Emperor, and Regarded as 

a Standard, by Eminent Scholars 

Bound in Cloth, 

Illustrated, Best Paper 

and Typographical Appearance 


PRICE $1.50 





Watson's M^wiazine 

Lniered as second-class matter January 4, 1911. at the ■'*<^«^ Wjce at Thomson, Georgia, 
Under the ^Rct of March 3. 1 .9■^^^ 



Vol. XXL 

AUGUST, 1915 

No. 4 



FRONTISPIEeE—The Old Paths. 




Published Monthly by THE jEFFERSONf AN PUBLISHING COMPANY. J nson, Ga. 

5g4'4'«^4«4''^4''^'l''l'4'4''^* 4'4''4''l'4'.4'4''i'4'4'4'4'4'4»4'4'4'3« 




T came to pas-., m t he olden days, that 
the Lord Goci of Hosts raised up men 
among the people, me n who spoke as never 
men • spake before— fnen whose tongues 
were tipped with cele.stial fire, and whose 
winged words have flown to the uttermost 
parts of the earth, to live on and on, until 
this poor scroll shalf shrivel at the Last 
Day, and Time shall merge into Eternity. 
And one of these ' men— mocked then, 
and unheeded now— s;aid to the Israelites : 

" Thus saith the Lord of. hosts, the God of Israel, 
Amend your ways and your do., ngs. Trust ye not inlying 
words. For if you thoroughly amend your ways and your 
doings ; if ye thoroughly execute Judgment between a man 
and his neighbour; if ye oppn^ss not the stranger, the fath- 
erless, aud the widow, end's' hed not innocent blood in this 
place, neither walk after oth er gods to your hurt : then 
will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the land that I 
gave to your fathers, forever and ever. Behold, ye trust 
to lying words. Ye steal, nturder and commit adultery. 
. . . Is this house which is called in my name become 
a den oj robbers?" (Jer. vii.3|i2,) 

And again he said : 

"This people hath a revbl'ting and a rebellious heart; 
they are revolted and gone. Neither say they in their 
heart, Let us now fear the Lor-d our God, that giveth rain, 
both the former and the latter, in due season: He reserveth 
unto us the appointed weeks cf the harvest. Your iniqui- 
ties have turned away these things, and your sins have 
withholden good things from you. For among My people 
are found wicked men : they \ lay wait as he that setteth 
snares; they set a trap, thdy catch men. Asa cage is 
full of birds, so are their hoiises full of deceit; therefore 
they are become great, and waxen rich. They are waxen 
fat, they shine : yea, they overf,ass the deeds of the wicked, 
they Judge not the cause, the cause of the fatherless, yet they 
prosper ; and the right of th.'^ needy do they not Judge. 
Shall 1 not visit for these things? saith the Lord: shall not 
my soul be avenged on such a nation as this ? A WON- 
THE LAND. (Jer. v. 28-30,) 

^ *f* *f* •!• *f* •!• "f* "f* •!• •!• •!* •!* "f* •!• «f* *|* «^ »|« .^ t^ •!« •!* »!• »l« »!• ^ ^ *l* »l^ 


Watson's Magazine 

THOS. E. WjATSON, Editor 

THe Dark Ages ; TKe Extinction of Learning 

THe Renaissance and the Beginning of Modern Intellectual 


TFIE historian, Gibbon, declares 
that the period during which 
the human race was happiest 
was the 200 j^ears the philosophical 
emperors ruled the Koman Empire. 
This period, of course, preceded the 
dominance of Christianity. 

The almost perfect Roman law was 
obeyed, from the Euphrates to the 
Ebro, and the Seine and the Thames. 
Life and property were secure. 

The schools were open everywhere. 
The statue, the painting, the elegant 
architecture, the ideal dwelling, the 
lovely parks and gardens, the public 
baths, the fountains, the open 
forum where each citizen could debate 
and vote, the magnificent places of 
recreation and amusement, where the 
poorest had the same pleasure as the 
richest — these civilizing influences 
were felt throughout the world. 

The Roman road brought all rations 
together. The 'Roman eagles enlisted 
soldiers of every race and clime: in! 
the Roman camp, the Gaul, the Ger- 
man, the Spaniard, the Briton, the 
Greek, the Latin, the Asiatic met on 
common footing. 

Sometimes, the chief command ofi 

the Roman armies was invested in a| 

Goth, in a Vandal, in a Spaniard, in i 

t native African. (A white man, I 

lowever. ) | 

!= In the Roman Senfte, a native ofj 

Gaul might sit by the side of a 
descendant of the proudest Roman 

The poorest Roman could go to the 
public granary and get his measure 
of wheat, his allowance of wine, his 
dole of oil. Nobody starved in 'pagan 
Rome — save when some wide-spread 
famine smote the world. 

The poorest Roman had access to 
the elaborate baths, where hot and 
cold water were provided in never- 
failing abundance. In the baths of 
Diocletian, 3,600 persons could bathe 
at one time. 

From the Sabine hills, enormous 
aqueducts brought down to the city 
the purest mountain streams; and the 
poorest washer-woman in Rome could 
use all the water she needed, free of 

This system prevailed all over the 
Roman world; and, today, you may 
see in London and in other great 
centres of modern population, the 
remains of ancient baths, aqueducts, 
theatres, bridges and forums — struc- 
tures designed for the good of the 
common people. 

The early Christians were mostly 
poor people who could not read and 
write. In Rome, they made many 
converts among the slaves. 

At the time, a highly developed 
civilization existed in Egypt, Asia 


WATSON'S Magazine. 

Minor, on the Mediterranean, in 
Greece, and in Eome itself. 

The Roman emperors were pushing 
this civilization into Spain and (xm 

(See Mommsen's Roman histories, 
Mitford's Greece, Rose's Greece, ( rib- 
bon's Rome, Tuker's Roman Life 
Under the Caesars, Gregorovious' 
Hadrian, Henderson's Nero, Sis- 
mondi's Literature of Europe, and 
Lecky's great work on European 
Morals. ) 

The Romanist says that his 
church planted her banner upon the 
ramparts of paganism, and sustained 
a single-handed combat with it for 
1,500 years before the birth of Pro- 

Would that this were true! 

Christianity was comparatively 
pure at first, and this purity was one 
cause of its rapid spread. 

But after Constantine decreed it to 
be the religion which every Roman 
soldier should adopt, the pagans sim- 
ply moved over into the Christian 
church, bringing their pagan beliefs 
and customs. 

It was precisely because Rome car- 
ried this adoption of paganism too 
far, that she was denounced by so 
many of her own adherents. 

Rome was far more pagan in her 
creed and her rites, in the time of 
Luther, than she was in the time of 
the last Roman emperor. 

She is far more pagan now, than 
she was in the time of Luther. 

The Romanist declares that hun- 
dreds of tiiousands of Christian mar- 
tyrs perished during the early cen- 
turies. He grossly exaggerates the 

But I beg to call attention to the 
vital fact, that when those heroic 
Christian martyrs died, there was no 
pope, no College of Cardinals, no 
making of God out of a wafer, no 
human forgiveness of sins, no claim 
that a priest becomes the equal of 
Christ at the altar, no confessional 

box, no worship of images, no Roman 
Catholic monarchy, self-perpetuating, 
and ruling the laity, from above. 

The Emperor Constantine and his 
successors commanded the Pagan 
world to embrace Christianity; and 
pie Pagan world obeyed — carrying 
[paganism along with it. The indi- 
vidual can undergo a change of heart, 
can be converted from sin to repent- 
ance and to a new life, but nations 
cannot be thus instantaneously trans- 
formed. National beliefs, national 
customs, and national superstitions 
cannot be destroyed by imperial 
decree. Even a Peter the Great had 
to capture each Boyar and apply the 
shears to said protesting Muscovite, 
in order to rid Russia of the out- 
landishly long beards. 

Paganism having been ordered into 
the Christian church, went, but lost 
little or no baggage in changing cars. 

Paganism had long been accus- 
tomed to a pope, and to a College of 
Cardinals; the Christian church soon 
grafted on to itself a similar Pontifex 
and a similar Sacred College. 

Paganism had believed in demi- 
gods, in statues that worked miracles, 
in sacrifices which washed away sins, 
in holy water, in processions, in many 
altars, in the burning of incense, in 
sacred places, in purgatory, in a Vir- 
gin who was the Queen of Heaven, 
the Mother of the gods. 

The Christian church, swarming 
with Pagans, imported all of this 
pagan paraphernalia, together with 
the adoration of images, and the 
celibacy which concentrated priestly 
obedience to the pope. 

In short, the simplicity of the 
Primitive Church of Christ disap- 
peared completely from the Roman 
Catholic church. 

* * 3H * * * 

The Bishops of Rome having 
secured from the Emperors, the rec- 
ognition of their supremacy over 
other bishops, s-^nd having advanced 



the bishopric to a Papacy, stretched 
forth a sceptre of Universal Domin- 

Being God's viceroys on earth, 
popes could dispose of crowns and 
peoples, could enthrone and dethrone 
monarchs, could divide between rival 
claimants the Old World and the 
New, could carry in their hands life 
and death, on earthy in heaven^ and in 

Where the Papa frowned, there 
was excommunication, ostracism, un- 
merciful persecution, excruciating tor- 
ture, and miserable death. 

Kings were educated in this fright- 
ful faith, and believed it — hence the 
King held the pope's stirrup when 
he mounted his mule, and kissed the 
pope's foot when he conferred a 

The learned men were educated 
in this monstrous faith and believed 
it — hence the scholar of the Dark 
Ages wrote fables and wonders which 
a child of common sense, and mental 
freedom^ would laugh at, as he laughs 
at Mother Goose, Mother Hubbard, 
and Jack the Giant-Killer. 

Scientists had to choose between 
concealment, and the ferocity of ignor- 
ant religious fanaticism. Those who 
knew more than the sottish popes 
and priests, did well to lock their 
dangerous knowledge within their 
own breasts. 

Since God created this wicked 
world, no overlord had ever claimed, 
and exercised^ the right to banish the 
bridegroom from the nuptial bed, and 
to lie with the hnde, on the first 
night following "the sacred covenant" 
of marriage, until the Roman Cath- 
olic church had won the absolute^ 
control of Europe. 

Then, the foul, inhuman, bestial 
right of the first night was claimed 
and exercised by Feudal lords, both 
lay and cleric. That diabolical right 
was not exchanged for a money 

indemnity until a comparatively 
recent period. 

That hellish right was in full oper- 
ation in the Philippine Islands, at 
the time that our Government ac- 
cepted the revolted Filipino as allies 
against Spain, in the war of 1898. 

(See Official Report of the Taft 
Commission, Senate Document 190, 
2nd Session 56th Congress.) 

"Who can say positively why the 
Spanish nation, so dominant at one 
time, has been distanced in the race? 
The awakening of the nations of 
Europe from the Dark Ages, is a 
still more perplexing problem. At 
this early period, as Mr. Galton has 
remarked, almost all the men of a 
gentle nature, those given to medita- 
tion or culture of the mind, had no 
refuge except in the bosom of the 
church which demanded celibacy; and 
this could have hardly failed to have 
had a deteriorating influence on each 
successive generation. 

During this same period the Holy 
Inquisition selected with extreme care 
the freest and boldest men, in order 
to burn or imprison them. In Spain 
alone some of the best . men — those 
who doubted and questioned, and 
without doubting there can be no 
progress — • were eliminated during 
three centuries at the rate of a thous- 
and a year. The evil which the Cath- 
olic Church has thus effected, is incal- 

"Sir C. Lyell has already (Prin- 
ciples of Geology, Vol. II., 1868, p. 
489) called attention, in a striking 
passage, to the evil influence of the 
Holy Inquisition, in having lowered, 
through selection, the general stand- 
ard of intelligence in Europe.'''' 

All through the church literature 
of the Middle Ages, will be found the 
evidence of the grovelling minds of 
religious fanatics, bigots and miracle- 
mongers. Whenever a Roman Cath- 



olic of superior, independent mental- 
ity appeared, he was silenced, or was 
crushed. If too troublesome, he was 

Education was denounced: Bible 
reading, made criminal: free speech, 
forbidden; freedom of conscience, 
punished by death and consignment 
to everlasting torments. 

Babes unhorji were damned^ because 
not baptised. 

(Orthodox Roman Catholics hold 
to that hideous belief, even in our 
own day.) 

To kill a heretic, was no crime: 
popes slew them with crusading 
armies, by wholesale: Catholic kings 
Durnt them at the stake, or butchered 
them in deliberate massacres. In 
these atrocious persecutions, no dis- 
tinction of age, or sex, was respected: 
the gray hairs of the elders, and the 
glossy locks of prattling childr< ; 
were alike stiffened in their own life- 

Pregnant women were led to the 
torture, or cut down by the sword, or 
tied to the blazing stake. Infants at 
ih^ breast were snatched away, and 
their brains dashed out, as agonized 
mothers looked on. 

The world had never known such a 
nightmare of faith, of blind credulity, 
of unquestioning obedience, of ruth- 
less cruelty, of unstinted blood-shed 
as that which the popes inflicted upon 
it. No wonder that the Eomanists of 
today are exerting themselves so 
industriously and so unscrupulously, 
to suppress tHe damning facts of his- 

The worst of all earthly records is 
that of the Eoman Catholic Church. 

The worst of all human dynasties^ 
is that of the popes of Rome. 

4: ^ :): 4: :!: « 

In the Vatican, in the convents, in 
the monasteries, in the lives of the 
priests, there ,^ame such enormities, 
of vice, of crime, of shameless hypoc- 
risy, that the whole European world 

groaned under the tremendous afflic- 

Within the church, the voice of 
protest had been raised in vain. 
Arnold, Jerome, Huss, Savonarola — 
faithful adherents of Rome — had 
sounded the alarm and had demanded 
a change. 

They loere murdered; and Rome 
went on, trom very bad to very much 

The concubine shared the bed of 
the "Successor of St. Peter;" the 
bastard hailed as Father^ the "vice- 
roy of Christ;" the murderer stood 
by the Papal throne, and a guilty 
pope gazed appalled into the unquail- 
ing eyes of his homicide son, 

(Alexander VI., and Ca?sar Bor- 

A pope (^Sixtus IV.) set the prece- 
dent of licensing the prostitute, by 
laying a tax upon her trade; and 
other popes followed his example. 
Tribute wrung from the white slaves 
in brothels became a source of priestly 
revenue. (See Human Sexuality^ p. 

A pope (Julius II.) could not take 
off his shoes on Good Friday, because 
his foot was rotten with syphilis. 
{Human Sexuality^ p. 258, citing 

A pope (Leo X.) was a chronic 
sufferer from venereal disease. {Ibid.) 

A pope (Alexander VI.) was ac- 
cused by a devout Roman Catholic 
author of incest with his own bastard 
daughter. (P. J. Pontani, VI. III., 
book 28, p. 294.) 

A pope amused himself by calling 
in courtesans to dance naked before 
him, and offered a prize to the man 
who could commit the carnal act the 
greatest number of times with these 
nude prostitutes — the witnesses and 
judges being the pope, his bastard 
son and his bastard daughter. 

{Diarium of Canon John Burchard, 
secret Chamberlain of Pope Alexan- 



der VI. Cited on p. 259 of Human 

A pope (John XII:) was tried and 
convicted by a Eoman Catholic synod, 
of blasphemy, perjury, sim^tny, sac- 
rilege, adultery, incest, and' murder. 

This infallible vice-roy of Christ 
was killed by a husband, who caught 
Mm in the act of adultery with his 

A pope (Gregory II.) was accused 
by a Roman Catholic Council of 
usurpation, heresy, assassination, and 

A pope (John XXIII.) was con- 
victed by the Council of Constance 
of heresy, deism, adultery, incest, 
murder, and sodomy. This infallible 
Papa denied the immortality of the. 
soul, the resurrection, and the moral 
responsibility of man. He deflowered 
one hundred nuns, and his three sis- 
ters charged him with the loss of 
their chastity. 

A pope (Julius III.) disguised his 
concubine as a man, and made her a 
cardinal, in order that she might, 
without scandal, be near him, to 
minister to his lusts. This infallible 
vice-roy of Christ died of a loath- 
some disease. 

A pope (Gregory XVI.) who died 
so recently as 1846, fitted up sumptu- 
ous rooms in the Vatican for his mis- 
tress, Cajetanina, the wife of an ob- 
scure, devout and obliging barber. 

A pope (I'lus IX.) whose precious 
life was spared to a day within our 
own memory, left behind him two 
beautiful bastard daughters, who were 
greatly admired in the Holy City. 

It was this- Papa who, in 1870, 
dragooned his church into the dog- 
matic declaratfon that all popes — 
good, bad and indifferent; past, 
present and future — were Infallible/ 

And it was a pope (Sixtus IX.) 
who issued a Brief, legalizing for 
three months in the year, the un- 
speakable lewdness which provoked 

the destruction of Sodom and Gomor- 
rah ! 

A pope's acknowledged daughter 
took her place among the famous 
criminals of modern ages: a pope's 
acknowledged illegitimate son became 
a cardinal while yet in his teens: a 
pope's written sanction authorized 
the depopulation of Southern France, 
the enslavement of Catholic Ireland, 
and the human shambles in which 
100,000 Hollanders were pitilessly 

A pope anathamatized the barons 
of Runnymede, damned the Great 
Charter of our liberties, and dis- 
graced the prelate, Langton, who had 
dared to side against King John. 

A pope declared that it was neces- 
sary to eternal salvation that every 
human being should be the subject 
of Rome — not a Bible Christian, not 
a believer in Christ, not a doer of 
good works, not an uplifter of his 
fellowman; not a conscientious. God- 
fearing, right-living man, hut a sub- 
ject of the Pope! 

As an evidence of the state of mind 
to which the most learned Christian 
fathers were reduced, let us consider: 

(1.) Lactantius condemned as 
heretical, and therefore damnable, the 
doctrine that the earth is round. He 
said: "Is it possible that men can 
be so absurd as to believe that the 
crops and the trees on the other side 
of the earth hang downward, and 
that men have their feet higher than 
their heads? If you ask them how 
they defend these monstrosities, how 
things do not fall away from tlie 
earth on that side, they reply the 
nature of things is such that heavy 
bodies tend toward the centre, like 
the spokes of a wheel. * * * Now, 
I am really at a loss what to say of 
those who, when they have once gone 
wrong, steadily persevere in their 
folly and defend one absurd opinion 
bv another." 



(2.) St. Augustine asserts that "it 
is impossible there should be inhabi- 
tants on the opposite of the earth, 
since no such race is recorded by 
Scripture among the descendants of 

(3.) Roman orthodoxy bitterly 
condemned the idea that the world is 
governed by uniform laws. Roman 
orthodoxy planted itself upon the 
proposition that special Providence 
ruled everything. The laws of nature 
did not move the stars; did not cause 
the eclipse, did not charge the clouds 
with moisture and empty it upon the 
earth in the form of rain. 

Roman orthodoxy held that angels, 
selected for tnat purpose, moved the 
stars, filled the clouds and manipu- 
lated the eclipses. 

Roman orthodoxy rated the physi- 
cian who altered physical conditions 
by the administration of earthly 
medicine, as little better than an 
atheist. Any remarkable cure effected 
by the physician was almost certain 
to be attributed to black magic; and 
to prevent a repetition of such un- 
godly curing, the physician was almost 
certain to be put to death. 

Roman orthodoxy held that all 
bodily ailments could be, and should 
be, alleviated by the intercession of 
saints, and by relics — the saints and 
the relics working miraculously upon 
the ailments. 

Pope Gregory the Great implicitly 
believed in the power of men to work 
miracles, in the power of men to cast 
out devils, in the reality of ghosts, 
and in the power of priests to call the 
dead back to life. He hated all 
human learning, expelled from Rome 
the teachers of mathematics, burned 
the great library which the Csesars 
had collected, forbade the study of 
the classics, mutilated - the most per- 
fect statuary, and reduced to ruins 
the most beautiful temples ever reared 
by the hand of man. 

He exerted himself to destroy his- 

torical writings, and to this fanat- 
ical monk, the scholarship of today 
owes its sigh of regret for "the lost 
books of Livy." 

Of this arrogant pope it was truth- 
fully snjd that "no lucid ray ever 
beamed on his superstitious soul." He 
gloried in that terrible maxim which 
the Roman Catholic Church had 
adopted: ^''Ignorance is the mother of 

(4.) When we remember that 
Giordano Bruno was burned to death 
in Rome itself so late as the year 
1600, and that one of the damnable 
heresies imputed to him was his con- 
tention that there are otlKir wor' is 
than this, it requires little effort ot 
the imagination to realize what deadly 
■ danger there had been for the wisdom 
of laymen to question the profound 
ignorance of the clergj\ 

Comment upon a fact and a deduc- 
tion so appalling, and so terribly veri- 
fied by history, would be superfluous. 

In the Dark Ages which Pop^y 
brought upon the world. Woman lost 
her high estate. 

Tertullign, the great Roman Cath- 
olic Father, taught: "Woman, thou 
shouldst ever go in mourning and 
sackcloth, the eyes filled with tears. 
Thou has brought about the ruin of 

Saint Jerome taught that "woman 
is the gate of the devil, the road of 
evil, the sting of the scorpion." (De- 
Cult u Feminarum, Vol. 1, Chap. 1.) 

The canon laAv of the Roman Cath- 
olic Church declared — "Man, only, is 
created to the image of God, not 
woman; therefore, woman shall serve 
him and be his handmaid." 

In the sixth century after Christ, 
the Roman Catholic Church, in one 
of its Councils, debated the question 
as to whether woman had a soul at 

Throughout the world of today 
there is no phenomenon more striking 



and characteristic than the emancipa- 
tion of Woman. She is breaking the 
cords with which besotted ecclesias- 
ticism bound her for thousands of 

-Stifled by clerical narrowness and 
tyranny, she is finding her voice. 
Shaclded by priestly prejudice and 
pride, slfe is breaking her chains and 
rejoicing in a freedom of movement 
that she has not known since the 
Roman Church branded her with 
infamy as having been the original 
introducer of sin into the world. 

Buried alive by Roman Catholic 
misconception of the true relation of 
the sexes, she has at length been 
touched by the magic spell of modern, 
intellectual freedom; and is again 
becoming as she was before the advent 
of Roman Catholicism, the queen of 
the home, the empress of men's hearts, 
the inspiration of men's best ambi- 
tion, the light and the joy of all that 
is best in the world. 

Under the degrading yoke of Rome, 
womanhood for thousands of years 
accepted an inferior position, obeyed, 
served, sacrificed, and remained mute. 

No woman dared to enter the en- 
chanted realm of Letters. No Sappho 
sang during the nightmare of Roman 
domination. No Hypatia taught in 
school or college. No Aspasia puri- 
fied and elevated the thoughts and 
the purposes of any Pericles. 

A slave of the unmarried priest, H 
slave to the husband, an instrument 
of pleasure to the libertine, woman's 
very existence was blotted out in the 

civil law which popes imposed upon 
the world; and against the brutal hus- 
band, the wife might piteously plead, 
in vain. 

For the custody of her own chil- 
dren, she might plead, in vain. 

For liberation from the hell-holes 
in which lustful monks confined her, 
she might plead, in vain. 

Into the Church, and into the State, 
woman was merged, Iqpt her indi- 
vidual existence, was absorbed into a 
system, without the right to utter a 
single word as to the organization, 
the purpose, and the methods of that 
system. Like flakes of snow, pure 
women drifted down from the unseen 
world above, fell upon the dark tor- 
rents of life below, were for a mo- 
ment white, then lost forever. 

In the recklessness of pride and 
mendacity, the Roman Catholic 
Church will tell you that it elevated 
woman to the position she now holds. 

The God's truth is, that woman of 
recent years has just begun to recover 
what she was robbed of, when super- 
stitious, ignorant, petticoated celibates 
began to lay down the law for the 
men and the women who remained 
outside the pale of the priesthood. 

Woman is gaining nothing new; 
she is simply regaining the jewels of 
personal and intellectual liberty of 
which she was stripped, when morbid, 
fanatical and intolerant priests arro- 
gated to themselves the right to dom- 
inate her person, her mind, and her 

(concluded next month.) 

The Celebrated Case oflTKe State of Georgia 

vs. Leo Frank. 

(Copyrighted: All rights reserved.) 

THE laws of Georgia are extra- 
ordinarUy favorable to a person 
accused of crime He is not only 
protected in all of his rights under 
the Constitution of the United States, 
but he enjoys privileges far beyond 
those limits. No indictment against 
him will stand, if it can be shown 
that a single grand juror was dis- 
qualified, or failed to take an oath 
on that particular case. 

Therefore, our grand juries are bound 
in each case by a special oath, in 
addition to the usual general oath; 
and they examine the witnesses in 
each case, separately, behind closed 
doors, having the right to call in 
other witnesses besides those named 
by the State's Attorney. 

The law authorizes the Judge to 
remove the case to another jurisdic- 
tion, himself., whenever the circum- 
stances satisfy him that the ends of 
justice require it. 

If the Judge does not act upon his 
own initiative, the defendant's coun- 
sel can move for a change of venue; 
and support it by affidavits tending 
to prove that the feeling in the com- 
munity is so excited against the 
accused, that it is impossible for him 
to therein have a fair trial. 

Our Code is also exceedingly len- 
ient in the matter of continuances. 
The absence of a material witness; 
the illness of leading counsel, or of 
the defendant; the want of sufficient 
time to procure important testimony, 
are among the grounds upon which 
accused persons gain time; and these 
motions are continually being made 

for no other purpose than to allow 
for the passing away of whatever local 
prejudice may have been aroused 
by the first rumors and exaggerations 
incident to most crimes of violence. 

If the defense is ready for trial, 
and makes no motion to change the 
venue, each juror of a legally quali- 
fied panel is subjected to a rigid 
examination, as to his freedom from 
bias and prejudice in that particular 
case; and the defendant can put each 
juror, separately, on trial — the Judge 
being the trior — and offer against the 
juror such evidence as will prove that 
he is not, in the eyes of the law, a 
fair juror to try that case. 

During the trial, the defendant may 
act, wholly or in part, as his own 
lawyer: he may interrogate the wit- 
nesses, and he may address the Court. 
If he does not choose to make a state- 
ment in his own defense, to the jury, 
he may remain silent; and the law 
does not permit the State'' s Attorney 
to comment upon that silence. 

He may write out a statement in his 
own defense and read it to the jury, 
or he may tell his story in the usual 
way of verbal narrative: he can cover 
almost any ground he pleases, and he 
can talk as long as he likes; and if 
he omits any fact, or explanation 
which his lawyers consider material, 
they are privileged to direct his atten- 
tion to his failure to cover that par- 
ticular point. 

After the defendant has finished 
bis statement — of ten minutes, or ten 
hours — and has been aided by the 



vigilance of his lawyers, he can say to 
the State's Attorney: 

"I am willing for you to ask me 
about the case." 

But if the defendant does not volun- 
tarily make this offer, the State is not 
allowed to interrogate him at all. 

jury, that it is their privilege to attach 
to defendant's statement just such 
weight as tiiey see fit. They may 
believe it in part, and disbelieve it in 
part: they may reject it entirely, or 
they may accept it entirely: they may 
disregard all the sworn testimony in 


Nor is the State's Attorney per- 
mitted, in his address to the jury, to 
comment upon the fact that the de- 
fendant was unwilling to be cross- 

In no event, can the accused be put 
under oath: but our law makes it the 
duty of the Judge to instruct the 

the case, and rest their verdict on the 

In all the legislation mercifully 
designed to protect innocence, and to 
give to a man of good character the 
golden opportunity to stake his word 



against the oath of unreliable wit- 
nesses, there is nothing which sur- 
passes the Coae of Georgia. 

Time and again, I have seen a 
defendant at the bar rise, like a lion 
from his lair; and make a manly, 
ringing, indignant statement to the 
jury, and shake off from himself the 
evidence of circumstances, or of per- 
jury, as easily as the leonine monarch 
shakes the dew drops from his mane. 

Again and again, during my quar- 
ter-of-a-century in the court-house, 1 
have seen my clients, and other law- 
yers' clients, confound the prosecu- 
tion, by facing the Court and coun- 
try, and saying, with the boldness of 
conscious innocence — 

"Cross-examme me to your heart's 
content: I have nothing to hide, and 
nothing to fear!" 

Such a waiver of legal screenage^ 
half wins the battle, the very instant 
the defendant makes it. 

Let me say at this point — in order 
that you may enter the case properly 
informed — that the attorneys of Leo 
Frank were the most experienced and 
most competent members of the At- 
lanta bar: thoroughly familiar with 
local affairs, local prejudices, local 
politics, local dns and out, of all kinds: 
and yet tftiey did not move to con- 
tinue the case, nor did they ask for a 
change of venue: consequently^ those 
Atlanki lawyers were not aware of 
any ^^moh spirit^'' at that time. 

Afterwards, it became necessary to 
manufacture things which had not ex- 
isted; and the "mob spirit," which 
Frank's able attorneys had been ignor- 
ant of, was found somewhere in a 
small phial; was released, expanded, 
blown upon the four winds, until it 
became greater than the Djin of the 
"Thousand Nights and a Night" 

Those who continue the cry of "mob 
spirit," and "jungle fury," and "psy- 
chic intoxication," convict Frank's 
lawyers of not knowing their own 
business; for if a tithe of what is 

asserted, was ever capable of proof, 
Kosser and Arnold grossly misman- 
aged Frank's case. 

Let me say further, by way of pre- 
liminar}', that the defendant lis- 
tened during the eight hours' cross- 
examination of his alleged accom- 
plice; that he listened, day after day, 
and week after week, while his own 
trusted employees, and former friends 
gave evidence which linked around 
him the chain of circumstances; that 
he saw and heard the eleven white 
girls who swore that his character for 
lewdness was bad; that he listened to 
the white girls who swore to his 
lascivious conduct, in their dressing- 
room, and to his taking Kebecca Car- 
son into the ladies' private room, dur- 
ing work hours, and remaining inside, 
alone, with her for fifteen or twenty 
minutes; and that he sat silent while 
his negro trusty, of two years' stand- 
ing, told the jury how he would peep 
through the key-hole, and watch Leo 
Frank commit sodomy with Daisy 
Hopkins: yoi when this educated 
young man, this graduate of Cornell, 
at last took the stand to make a state- 
ment in his own defense, he drew 
around himself the screenage of our 
most lenient Code, and did not dare 
to say to Court and country — 

"/ am willing to answer questions!" 

In all that month of tedious, des- 
perate conflict, Leo Frank was the 
only person involved who escaped the 
ordeal of cross'-exarriination, except- 
ing the eleven white girls, whom his 
lawyers dared not interrogate. 

The State cannot go further than 
to inquire whether the defendant's 
character is good or bad; but the de- 
fendant can go into particulars, and 
can inquire of the witness, '■'•What is 
it, that you know against mef 

But in this case, Leo Frank did not 
put the white girls to the trouble of 
pulling the cover off his double life. 
He and his lawyers were only too 
glad to let tLe ladies go, without a 



word, after they had sworn that he 
was had. 

It should deeply impress you to 
learn, that eleven unimpeachable and 
disinterested white witnesses testified 
to Frank's double life; and that what 
they Imew of him was learned by them 
in his place of business, where Mary 



Phagan came to her death; and Frank 
was so certain the eleven white wit- 
nesses would only make it wo^'se for 
him on cross-examination, that his 
lawyers were afraid to ask those 
women what it was they knev)/ 

Is that the conduct of innocence? 

On Memorial Day, 1913, (April 
26th) Mary Phagan left her mother's 
home, shortly before noon, after hav- 

ing eaten dinner; and she was dressed 
in such cheap finery as a girl of her 
humble station in life could afford. 
She took the street car on her way 
into the city, and left it at a point 
some 300 yards from the National 
Pencil Factory, where she worked. 
On account of their running out of 
the metal tips, she had been laid off 
that week, after Monday; and she was 
now on her way to the office to get 
her Monday wages, because Frank, 
the Superintendent, had refused to 
send it to ner by her friend, Helen 
Ferguson, the day before, when Helen 
asked for it, as she had oft«n done 

When last seen, Mary was in two 
blocks of the factory (to which two 
or three more minutes' walk would 
have carried her), but no one saw 
her when she entered it. 

That night, her people gave out the 
alarm, for they at once suspected foul 
play. Mary was not quite fourteen 
years old; and had never been irregu- 
lar in her habits, nor ever out of 
nights; and her failure to return 
home created the most distressing 
anxieties and forebodings. 

The police were notified, and a 
search for the missing girl com- 
menced. At first, it was believed that 
she had overstayed herself with some 
party of triends, enjoying the holi- 
day; and there were vague reports of 
her having been seen, first with one 
companion, and then with another. 
But none of these rumors proved well- 
founded; and the dread apprehension 
of something tragic grew stronger 
and stronger in the household of the 
mother, and also among the police. 

During all of that evening of the 
efforts to locate the missing girl, no- 
body appears to have thought of call- 
ing 'up the Leo Frank house, and 
asking him had he seen her. True, he 
would not nave been found at home: 
he was spending that particular after- 
noon alone in the factory, but neither 



Mary's folks, nor the police sus- 
pected it. 


Let US now turn our attention to 
Frank, and follow his movements that 
Memorial Day morning. In parting 
from the night watchman, Newt Lee, 
who of course went otf duty early, 
Frank asked him to return that after- 
noon at 4 o'clock. Frank explained 
that he wanted to get olf earlier than 

During the morning (Saturday, 
26th), several employees, and rela- 
tives of employees, came to get wages 
due, and got them from Frank. Two 
men, Denham and White, were at 
work on the fourth floor, tearing 
down an old partition and putting up 
a new one. Necessarily, they made a 
deal of noise at this kind of work; 
and they were doing it some 200 feet 
back from the elevator shaft and 
stair-landing. Consequently, they 
were the less apt to hear a scream 
two floors below, or to hear the sound 
of a fall, or to hear the elevator, if 
it ran. 

The wife of one of these workmen 
(Mrs. Arthur White) came to the fac- 
tory to see him at 11 :30, and unex- 
pectedly returned at 12:30. She was 

not an employee, and did not know 
Jim Conley. 

But Mrs. White, and two white 
men (Graham and Tillander) swore 
that they saw the negro, sitting not 
far from the foot of the stairs, on 
the first floor, where Conley worked, 
and where he generally sat when idle. 

Frank's office and place of work 
was on the floor above; and his desk 
was in the inner room, while the safe 
was in the outer. The time-clock was 
near by, ana it was Frank who put 
in, and took out, the slips of paper on 
which the punches were registered^ 

Frank stated ,again and again, that 
he left his office at about 11 o'clock 
that morning, and went to his Uncle 
Montag's place of business; and that, 
after his return to his office, he never 
left it at all, until he went home to 
dinner, at about 1 o'clock p. m. 

He did go to Montag's, and a white 
lady, of the most unquestionable char- 
acter, made affidavit to the fact that 
she saw him and Jim, Conley in close 


conversation at about 11 o''clock^ Tiear 
Montag''s place. 

This bit of testimony is of superla- 
tive importance; and the defendant 
was never able to shake it in the least. 



It proves that the Jew was talldng 
in a secretive, confidential manner 
with the negro, on the sidewalk, where 
he thought he was unobserved — and 
this negro had been his trusty for two 
years! This is the same negro upon 
whom such a torrent of vituperation 
was afterwards poured, when it be- 
came necessary to find a scapegoat 
for Leo Frank. 

The story, invented long after- 
wards, that Conley was drunk, and 
was "hiding behind some boxes in the 
gloom," is exploded by two white 
ladies — Mmes. White and Waits — and 
by two white men — Messrs. Graham 
and Tillander. 

Taking those four witnesses — who 
have no interest whatever in the case, 
and whose characters are entirely 
above attack — is it not clear to your 
mind that both Frank and Conley 
were on the scene of the crime that 
Saturday morning, and that each man 
knew the other was there? 

Besides, if the stenographer did 
not misunderstand Harry Scott, 
Frank told him^ on the Monday fol- 
lowing the crime, that Conley was in 
the factory that Saturday morning. 

As the whole argument pivots upon 
this vital fact, let me quote Harry 
Scott's exact language, from page 80 
of the record: 

"I knew on Monday that Mrs, 
White claimed she saw a darkey at 
the factory. I gave that information 
to the police department. Mr. Frank 
gave me the information the jirst time 
I talked with him.'''' (Monday after- 

Bear in mmd, that Scott was a 
Pinkerton detective, whom the Pencil 
Factory had employed to ferret out 
the crime; and that Scott was on the 
job, as a friend to Frank. 

According to medical testimony, 
Mary Phagan's death occurred in less 
than 45 minutes after she ate her 
dinner. The experts claim that the 
condition of the stomach proved this. 

But, waiving all questionable evidence, 
we come directly to what Leo Frank 
said — said with careful consideration, 




knowing that his words were being 
written down. 

After the girl's body had been 
found inside his place of business, and 
the rigidity of the remains showed 
that she must have been killed many 
hours before she was discovered, 
necessity compelled Frank to admit 
that she had come into the building 
that Saturday afternoon. There was 
no way out of it : the corpse was there : 
consequently, the living girl had come. 

But, when? 

The State followed her from her 
mother's, and onward in the street- 
cars, to the corner of Marietta and 
Forsyth Streets; and then traced her 
within two blocks of the factory, go- 
ing in that direction, and in less than 
four minutes' peart walk of its door. 

Watches and clocks varied, as they 
always do, but the time was right 
around the noon-hour. 



With the stiff, cold body in his 
place of business that nighty and the 
girl walking toward the door some- 
where near midday, Frank was neces- 
sarily compelled to fix a time, at least 
approximately, for her arrival. 

And he did so. He told Chief Lan- 
ford that the girl came to him for 
her money ''at from 12:05 to 12:10, 
maybe 12:07." 

His stenographer swore she punched 
the time-clock, and went away at 
12:02; and Frank said that the girl 
who Avas killed came next. 

lie did not know that another girl 
had come^ at that identical time, 
12:05, and had remained until 12:10; 
and had searched both ojfices for Leo 
Frank, without seeing him, or hear- 
ing him; and without seeing or hear- 
ing anything of Mary Phagan. 


This girl, whose visit to his vacant 
office was unknoion to Frank, proved 

the most invincible link in the chain 
of circumstantial evidence against 

When he afterwards learned the 
time of her visit, he changed the 
time of Mary's; but he only sunk 
deeper into the mire, as will be shown 
you later. 

The sum of one dollar and twenty 
cents was due Mary, and she not only 
wanted that pitiful sum, but wished 
to know whether there would be work 
for her, the following week. There- 
fore, she came and got her pay en- 
velope, and asked her employer — 
"Has the new metal come?" This 
was the same as asking, ''''Will there 
he work for me next weekf'' 

Frank told his detective tlm* 
answered the girl by saying, "/ don't 

The room in which Mary worked, 
putting the metal tips on the pencils, 
was on the same floor as Frank's 
office. It was some 200 feet away, 
and a door cut it off from the inter- 
vening space. 

The toilet for men and women was 
back there, beyond where Mary 
worked; and the men's part of the 
closet was separated from that of the 
women by a thin partition. 

In going to his toilet, Leo Frank 
had to pass close by Mary Phagan; 
where she sat at her machine; and he 
had been doing this, daily, for many 
months. Besides, he had made up her 
time, and paid her wages to her, again 
and again, weekly and for months. 
There were only four girls who 
worked in the metal room, and Mary 
was one of the four. 

Eemember this, for after the dead 
body was found, Frank claimed that 
he did not know whether a girl named 
Mary Phagan worked for him or not. 
He said he would have to consult his 

Now, let us return to Frank's office, 
which he claims not to have left at 
all, after his return from Montag's. 



He told Harry Scott, in the hearing 
of John Black, that he was in his 
office continuously^ from the time 
Hattie Hall, the stenographer, left at 
12 :02, on until Mrs. White saw him in 
the outer office at 12:30. 

Mark you, Frank and Conley are 
both visible at 12 :30, one upstairs, and 
the other down. Only about thirty 
feet of space separates them. 

For the present, we will not concern 
ourselves with the question as to 
where they were after 12:30, but will 
ask. Where were they hetween 12:02 
and 12:30? 

Within that brief period of less 
than half an hour, lies one of the 
blackest crimes on record. Within 
that' brief and guilty period, Mary 
Phagan enters into the possession of 
Leo Frank^ in his private office, ac- 
cording to his oivn statement. 

He does not claim that the girl had 
ever spoken to the negro, or had any- 
thing to do with him, or was in his 
power that fatal day. He admits that 
the girl safely passed the negro, as 
Hattie Hall had done, as Mattie Smith 
had done, and as Mrs. White had 
done, that same day, and near the 
same time. 

He admits that the doomed girl 
arrived unmolested, in his private 
office, where the tAvo were alone, with 
no persons nearer to them than the 
negro servant down stairs, and the 
two hammering and banging carpen- 
ters, two floors above, and 200 feet 

He admitted to Chief Lanford, and 
sicore to the Coroner's jury, that Mary 
Phagan went into his office, power, 
and possession, at a time that he vari- 
ously fixed at from 12:05 to 12:15. 

Then, where was Mary, that Mon- 
teen Stover could not see her, when 
Monteen was in the office, from 12:05 
to 12:10? 

And where was Frank? 

The State contends that when Mary 
inquired, "Has the metal come?" 

Frank answered, "I don't know," and 
that he took her back to the metal 
room, on the pretense of looking to 
see whether the metal had come. As 
they passed into the room, Frank 
closed the door behind them, thus 
giving them freedom from interrup- 
tion, for no one was at work on that 
floor on this legal holiday. 

In his statement to the jury, Frank 
said that, if he was not in his office 
at the time Monteen Stover swore he 
wasn't, he might have unconsciously 
gone to the toilet. 

The adoption of the theory not only 
gives him an unconscious spell of -five 
minutes.) but places him in the metal 
room, where Mary Phagan's blood 
and hair were fdtind. It not only 
places him at the place where Mary 
was assaulted, and then killed; but 
places him there at about the time 
it was done! 



In his desperate effort to escape 
the logical consequences of Monteen's 
evidence, he runs into a position 
equally desperate. 



To place himself where Mary was 
attacked, at the time she was attacked, 
is about equivalent to a confession that 
he was either the principal or the 
accessory in that attack. 

To arrive at a correct idea of the 
manner in which Mary was assaulted, 
we must have recourse to the testi- 
mony of Doctors Harris and Hurt. 

Taken together, they show that the 
girl was struck a violent blow, in 
front, which did not cut the skin, but 
which gave her a blue-black eye — just 
such a i3low as a clenched fist usually 
gives. In the back of her head was 
a cut to the bone, 21/2 inches long, 
"ranging from down upward." 

These two blows had been inflicted 
before death, and at practically the 
same time. The blow on the back 0! 
the head had rendered the girl uncon- 

There was blood caked in her thick, 
long hair; there was blood on her 
drawers, and there was blood on her 
private parts. There was evidence of 
violence and some sort of penetration, 
in the vagina, and this penetration 
appeared to have been made just be- 
fore her death. The uterus was that 
of a virgin, and there was no evidence 
of pregnancy. 

Her drawers were not only bloody, 
but torn, all the way up; and a strip 
of her under-garment had been torn 

This strip had a soft Iniot tied in 
it, as if it had been made a sort of 
pad to catch the blood; and this pad 
had soaked up the blood, and was full 
of it: therefore it had been under the 
cut in the head! 

In the removal of the body, the 
strip had slipped; and it was found 
lying loosely around the girl's neck, 
where it served no purpose of the 
murderer, for the cord did all that 
was necessary. 

For the present, we will confine 
ourselves to' these physical details, and 

endeavor to ascertain what they 
mean. •» 

Unless we are ready to believe that 
this pretty little white girl, dressed 
for the Memorial Day, was more 
filthy in her personal habits than the 
commonest wench, you will reject 
with disgust the contention of Gov- 
ernor Slaton, that the blood, stains 
came from her monthly sickness. No 
bandage was on her person, and her 
under-clothing was violently torn — 
and she was bloody, and there were 
signs of violence inside the vagina, 
do you doubt that some sort of sexual 
attack was made upon her? 

Be that as it may, the wound which 
ripped her scalp to the bone bled 
somewhere; and the question is,^ 

To cut the inquir}' as short as pos- 
sible, I will say that the evidence in 
the record fails to show any blood, 
anywhere, except on the first floor, at 
the ladies' dressing room, not far from 
the metal room door. 

The immense importance of the 
blood-marks begins to be obvious^ 
when liie record discloses the fact that 
the metal room and first floor had 
been swept up on Friday evening, 
preparatory to the legal holiday 
which would close it until next week. 

The men who cleaned up the place 
swore positively that there were no 
unusual marks on the floor Friday. 
Mell Stanford swept the floor, every 
foot of it, and was emphatic in his 
testimony. Equally emphatic was K. 
P. Barrett. 

Both these men were satisfied em- 
ployees of Leo Frank; and when- 
these two white men, early Monday 
morning, made the outcry about the 
blood on the floor, neither one of them 
had the slightest idea that their 
discovery would hurt Leo Frank! 

They found the blood, and they 
immediately made the outcry, but they 
did not know whom it would impli- 



<;ate in the crime. Please remember 

At that time, Leo Frank had not 
been suspected, much less accused; and 
at that time, he was endeavoring to 
fasten suspicion and evidence of guilt 
upon Newt Lee, the night watch. 

Following the rules of law, we are 
forced to accept the positive evidence, 
that the spots were not on the floor 
Friday, but were there Monday morn- 

Then we come face to face with the 
question — 

How came the spots on the floor? 

Say that they were made by paint: 
who spilled the painty on that floor, 
after Friday^ and before Monday? 

Produce the man, the woman, the 
boy, or the girl ! 

The defense could never do it, and 
cannot now do it. 

Say that the spots on the floor were 
made by blood: loho spilled the bloody 
on that floor, after Friday, and before 

Produce the person who did it! 

The defense was unable, and is now 
unable, to produce such a person. 


These tell-tale marks on the floor 
•caused excitement among the officers 
and employees of the factory, and 
every one could see that an elt'ort had 
been made to hide the blood by smear- 
ing a white substance over it — hasko- 

Of course, the attempt to conceal 
the spots had made "them the more 
conspicuous; and there was absolutely 
no conflict in the testimony as to some 
sort of spots on the floor, and some 
sort of Avb?te stufl' pmeared over them. 

To say that the accusing spots were 
on the floor Friday, is to impute will- 
ful perjury to two of Frank's friendly 
and intelligent workmen — a perjury 
without motive, and against their own 

To say that the accusing spots were 
not on the floor, Friday, imputes per- 
jury to no one, for no one swore that 
the spots were there, Friday. 


What, then, is the conclusion of 
inexorable logic? Nobody aid it, 
excepting the one man who does not 
dare to acknowledge that HE did it! 

That he may have had an accom- 



plice in it, does not alter the state of 
the case. 

Reasoning by the process of exclu- 
sion, we will say, quite naturally, that 
if any person, innocent of crime^ had 
spilled that blood (or paint), and had 
hurriedly tried to cover it with white 
powder, the innocent person would 
have come forward, when the hue 
and cry went forth, and would have 
said — 

"I'm the person who made those 
marks on the floor, after Friday and 
before Monday: and I will tell you 
how I came to do it." 

More especially would an innocent 
person have done that^ had he seen 
another innocent person endangered 
by the failure to account for those 
damning spots. 

But when no person comes forward 
to innocently explain what is the 

It is, that those spots show some- 
body's guilt : and the somebody wJio 
is responsible for the spots, is afraid 
to say, "I made them!" 

Where does that process of reason- 
ing take us? It takes us to Leo 
Frank, as the only person in the 
building who dares not come forward 
and tell how he came to make them, 
and ichy he tried to hide them. 


Let us go a step farther, and see 
what was found in the metal room, 
early Mondav mornmg. 

Frank's machinist, R. P. Barrett, 
had been at work in the metal room 
until quitting time Friday evening, 
and he left a piece of work in his 
machine. Immediately upon his re- 
turn, Monday morning, he noticed on 
the handle of his bench lathe, some 
strands of hair, swinging down. He 
at once called attention to it; and the 
strands of hair were seen and ex- 
amined by numerous employees of the 

The hair was almost immediately 
recognized as Mary Phagan's, for the 
only other girl there who had hair 
like Mary's was Magnolia Kennedy; 
and Miss Magnolia liad not been in 
the factory, at all, after Barrett (juit 
work Friday. 

One of the girls went running ta 
the others, exclaiming, 'TAey have\ 
found Mary Phagan's hair on Bar- 
retts machine P'' 

All this was on Monday morning,, 
when the general agitation had taken 
no definite direction; and when the 
men and girls in the factory were 
expressing themselves spontaneously, 
and truthfulh', without a thought of 
saying a word that would implicate 
the Superintendent, Leo Frank. 

Please hear this in mind! 

There was no "frame up'' against 
anybody^ in the outcrj' about the 
blood and the hair, for at that time 
nobody had any idea of who was 

As the hair was not on the handle 
of Barrett's machine, when he took 
his hands olt it, Friday evening: and 
as the hair icas on tne machine, Mon- 
day; and as the hair showed for itself 
that it was a woman's; and as the 
girls who knew Mary said it was 
her's, we must believe it was her's, 
unless some girl, or woman, came for- 
ward and said, '"''The hair is mine, 
and I will tell you how it came to 
be on the handle of Barrett's machine 
after Friday." 

There were 100 girls and women at 
work in the place, and only one of 
them had hair like Mary's: and this 
one girl (Magnolia Kennedy "> si id on 
oath that the hair was not Iiers, but 
seemed to be Mary's. What follows? 

Unless some outside woman's hair 
got on Barrett's machine, after Fri- 
day, we Tnust conclude that the hair 
was Mary's. 

It is impossible to suppose an out- 
side woman, for if one had come to 
meet Frank, or any one else, after 



Friday, either l^rank, or the woman, 
or hoth, would have given that ex- 
planation, and ended this part of the 


Isn't that perfectly clear to your 
mind? Let me state it, again: 

If Frank had an assignation with 
some outside woman, and took her to 
the metal room, where her hair might 
have dropped on the handle of the 
machine, is it conceivable that he 
would fail to thus account for the 

If any other man had such an ap- 
pointment with some outside woman 
whose hair might have got on the 
machine, would not that man have 
come forward to save Frank? 

Why did no such man, and no such 
outside woman pretend to have been 
the cause of the hair on the ma- 

Because no such man, and no such 
woman existed. 

Then we reason ourselves right 
back into the factory, and we say, 
that the long: strands of woman's 

hair, of that peculiar golden-brown 
color, came from the head of one of 
the 100 girls who worked there; and 
that, as not one of these girls can be 
induced to even pretend that the hair 
was hers, we are under the logical 
compulsion of saying it was Mary's. 

Those who would have claimed it, 
had it been theirs, will not: therefore, 
the hair didn't belong to any of them. 
But it had belonged to somehody, 
and as that somebody cannot be found 
by the defendant, or by the defend- 
ant's lawyers, or by the defendant's 
detectives, or by the defendant's par- 
tisans, we are driven to the conclusion 
that this undiscoverable somebody 
was Mary Phagan. 

Did the defense attach importance 
to this finding of the woman's hair 
on the handle of the machine? Did 
the able lawyers of Frank endeavor 
to account for the accusing strands? 
They did. They struggled to get 
away from the hair, as hard as they 
struggled to escape from the blood. 
What explanation did they offer? 

They proved that the girls some- 
times combed and did up their hair, 
not far from Barrett's machine; and 
they argued that some woman, doing 
this, might have flung her combed- 
out hair, in such a manner that it fell 
on the crank handle! 

Very well, froduce the looman with 
that kind of hair! The defense is 
unable to do so. 

But the State goes farther, and says 
to the defendant. Produce ANY 
GIRL, OR WOMAN, who was in 
that room after Barrett left his ma- 
chine Friday! 

Again, the defense is unable to 
do it. 

What follows? Of logical neces- 
sity, it follows, that as some woman, 
or girl, was in that room, after Bar- 
rett stopped his machine on Friday, 
and as no living girl or woman can 
he produced, the girl who was there 
is not alive! 



Even the sapient Burns realized to "I am prepared to prove that the lock 

the full the enormous weight of those °^ ^^^^ ^^« P^^^^'^ °^ the handle of a lathe 
.,,, , -° ,1- by a newspaper reporter for the sake of a 
SIX or eight strands of woman's hair, sensational 'scoop.'" 

In March, 1915, Burns and Lehon 
were '•''prepared to prove that the lock 
of hair was placed on the handle of 
a lathe by a newspaper reporter." 

Prepared to prove it, you see! 

The Burns Detective Agency had 
abandoned in despair the efforts to 
find a girl who would say that she 
went to that metal room after Fri- 
day evening, and that the hair might 
be hers. 

To find such a girl, is doubly diffi- 
cult, for the reason that Mary's hair 
and the hair on the machine matched; 
and that no other girl in the factory 
had that kind of hair; and it was 
not only necessary to discover an out- 
side girl with hair like Mary's, but 
a girl who could swear to an arrant 
falsehood without being caught in it. 

Consequently, the noble Detective 
Agency abandoned that line, discour- 
aged by the exposure of the bungling 
briberies of Epps, Duffy, Ragsdale, 
and Barber. 

They leave the girls, and discover 
"a newspaper reporter!" 

Well, where is he? Who is he? 
Why hasn't he been produced? The 
Prison Commission would have been 
glad to hear the gentleman. 

The Governor would have been 
overjoyed to welcome such an ally. 

The crime was not known to any 
reporter until Sunday morning: the 
hair was found Monday morning at 
6:30 o'clock: how did the reporter get 
into the room Sunday, without being 
seen? How did the reporter get 
the hair? Where did he get it? Did 
he pull it out of Mary's head in the 
basement, or did he go to the morgue 
after it? 

Tell us who is the reporter that 
remained silent during all that pro- 
longed trial of Leo Frank, during all 
the months of effort to find new testi- 


swaying upon the handle of Barrett's 
machine, for Burns' man, Lehon, 
gave out a statement, which was thus 
reported : 

Burns' Detective Declares Hair Was Placed 

by Reporter to Get "Scoop" in 

Frank Case. 

Special to The Washington Herald. 

San Francisco, March 20. — Evidence 
which it is claimed will clear Leo M. Frank 
of the charge of murdering little Mary 
Phagan, in Atlanta, on April 26, 1913, is 
in possession of Dan Lehon, a New Orleans 
detective, now in San Francisco. 

"One of the most startling bits in the 
chain of evidence which the State wove 
about Frank was a strand of hair found 
on the second floor of the factory," said 
Lehon today. 



mony, during the year and more that 
the case has travelled from Judge to 
Judge, from court to court, from 
courts to Prison Commission, and 
from Prison Commission to the Gov- 
ernor ! 



Hard-hearted newspaper reporter ! 
who must necessarily have been an 
Atlanta man, working for one of the 
Atlanta papers, which have heen 
so partial to Leo Frank! 

Apparently, Burns and Lehon give 
the public no credit for common sense. 
These brazen rascals have given out 
statement after statement, audacious 
falsehoods, told with confidence and re- 
peated with brazen insistence, hecause 
the State of Georgia had no press 
agency to defend her — and her Gov- 
ernor was a partner of the law firm 
defending Leo Frank! 

The Governor himself was mightily 
worried about the hair; and when he 
signed the 15,000-word mass of in- 
coherences which sought to justify his 
commutation of the sentence, he gave 
the public to understand that Dr. H. 

F. Harris had virtually destroyed the 
value of that part of the State's case. 

What is the truth of the matter, as 
shown by the official record? 

The grave of Mary Phagan was 
opened, and some of the hair taken 
from the head, ten days after her 
death. At the morgue, the under- 
taker, Gheesling, had cleansed the 
girl's head and hair, by washing it 
out thoroughly with tar soap. 

Now, the Doctor was asked to make 
a microscopic examination of the two 
tresses of hair; the one found on the 
handle of the machine; the other, 
taken from the exhumed body. 

This is what Dr. Harris said — 

"Affiant further says that the two 
specimens (of hair) were so much 
alike that it was impossible for him 
to form any definite and absolute 
opinion as to whether they were from 
the head of the same person or not." 

Were there ever two drops of water, 
grains of sand, leaves of trees, scales 
of fish, or strands of hair, exactly 

Are any two hairs of your head 
precise duplicates? Is there not a 
slight variation of texture and size 
in every two hairs out of every per- 
son's head? 

When Dr. Harris' microscope failed 
to reveal any decided difference in 
color, size, and texture, between the 
tress that came from the grave and 
the one which came from Barrett's 
machine, you may feel as certain as 
you need feel about anything, that 
the two tresses were once a portion 
of the same head of hair. 

That which we do not see, and do 
not learn from others who do see, we 
must learn from proved facts which 
convince us to a moral certainty; and 
when the microscope failed to show 
any difference that a conscientious 
examiner could swear to, the jury was 
bound to believe the hair was the 
same, unless the defendant could offer 
some evidence going to show that 



some other person dropped the hair 
on the machine. 

Until the defendant made some 
effort to identify some other person 
whose hair got on the machine in 
some way, after Friday, it would not 
have helped the defense, even if Dr. 
Harris had sworn that the hair on 
the machine was not the same as that 
taken from Mary Phagan's grave; for 
the simple reason that the State, and 
the jury, would immediately have 
said — 

"As you claim that it is difercn 
hah, there must be another girl wliom 
jou had in j'our employ, and lohom 
you can 'produce. PROD TJ G E 

uEur ■ 

So, it must be apparent to you that, 
ij Dr. Harris had testified as Gov- 
ernor Slaton insinuated, the defendant 
would not have been relieved, unless 
he could produce the other girl. And 
if he could have produced the other 
girl, he did not need the evidence of 
Dr. Harris. 

AYhich ever way you take it, you 
find yourself going round to the same 
conclusion: the hair was Mary's, be- 
cause they could not prove it to be 
anybody else's: and it had to be some- 

Produce the girl who went back 
there and combed her hair. It canH 
he done. Produce the woman who 
went back there, and did up her hair. 
It can't he done. Produce the girl, or 
the woman, who will swear that the 
hair might have been hers. IT 

They could monkey with the cook, 
and squelch her: they could monkey 
with the keeper of the lewd house, 
and run her out of Atlanta: they 
could buy poor old Ragsdale, and E. 
L. Barber; but they were utterly 
unable to prevail upon any woman to 
testify that the hair on Barrett's 
machine might have been hers. 

For Heaven's sake, use j^our com- 
mon sense! ^Yhat is the ONLY Governor Slaton admits tliat if it 

solution as to the hair., WHEN NO- 
BODY will claim itf 

The only possible solution is, that 
the girl who could have claimed it, 
IS DEAD! Dead in her tender 
youth, in the flower of her maiden- 
hood, in her glory of virginal purity 
— dead, as your little girl may be, 
some day, if other Leo Franks escape 
just punishment, through the machi- 
nations of Big Mo)i( )/. 

Tell us this— O tell us this!—li 
that hair on Barrett's machine came 
from the tresses of some girl who was 
still alive at the trial, why in God's 
name^ shouldn't she have come for- 
ward, and claimed it? 

There was nothing to disgrace her. 
She could have said she went to the 
toilet. She could have said she stood 
there, by the machine, doing up her 
hair. She could have said that she 
idly let a few strands fall, and that 
they might have caught on the handle 
of the machine. 

There was no disgrace to fear — why 
didn't the girl come forward? 

There is but one answer: 

The girl was dead! 

If, in Mary's uplifted, horrified, 
frantically opposing little hands, there 
had been found some hair, from the 
head of the simian Jew who was 
assaulting and killing her, the evi- 
dence wouldn't be a bit stronger. 

Governor John M. Slaton had be- 
fore him the undisputed testimony of 
the only possible girl, excepting Mary, 
whose hair it could have been; and 
this girl swore it was not hers, but 
seemed to be Mary's. 

When the only other possible girl 
swears herself out of it, what does 
inexorable logic say? Exclude every 
other person, and you have Mary 

It was Marj'^ who was there, Satur- 
day; and she asked Frank a question 
which suggested a visit to the metal 
room! . 



was her hair, it furnished (he highest 
and best evidence of Frank's guilt. 

Does it? Then Frank's guilt is 


Again I repeat, we lose Frank and 
Mary at 12:05; and we locate Frank 
again at 12:30, standiilg in his outer 
office, at the open safe, and starting 
nervously when spoken to by Mrs. 
White; but we do not find Mary any 
more, until 3 o'clock that night, when 
the night-watch. Newt Lee, in mak- 
ing his rounds, has a call of nature, 
while down in the basement, goes to 
the toilet there, and the' light of his 
lantern happens to fall upon the 

white legs of the dead girl — her dress 
havmg been partially thrown back as 
she was dragged by the heels, over 
the dirt floor. 

Newt Lee rushed up the ladder, 
and through the trap door, got the 
police headquarters over the telephone, 
and called for the officers to come at 
once: he told them he had found a 
dead white woman in the basement. 

They rushed to the place, went to 
the basement, and examined the body. 
It was lying on the side face, almost 
on the face; and the face itself was 
dark with congested blood, and with 
the dirt over which she had been 
dragged. Her tongue was out of her 
mouth, and around her neck was a* 
thick twine cord, tied so tight, that it 
had sunk into the flesh. 

Her arms were in a fixed position, 
folded across the breast. She was 
rigid all over. Near the body, lay 
her hat, shoes, and handkerchief. 
Near, also, were two notes, which pur- 
ported to have been written by the 
girl to her mother, describing how 
the tall, slim night watch had seized 
her as she went to the closet, and had 
thrown her down the scuttle-hole into 
the basement. 

Thus, the notes directed suspicion 
to Newt Lee. 

We may dismiss at once the idea 
that Newt Lee could have been guilty, 
but we must not forget that the notes 
accused him, positively and circum- 
stantially. If we afterwards learn 
from the record that Frank caused 
Lee's arrest for the crime, and fabri- 
cated a time slip for Saturday night, 
which gave Lee a period of the night 
unaccounted for on the clock — a suf- 
ficient peri or for him to have gone 
home and changed his shirt; and if 
we further find that Frank hinted,, 
and insinuated against Lee, until they 
searched his premises and found a 
bloody shirt in Lee's clothes barrel — 
if we shall hereafter learn all this 
from the record, we will he getting 



close to the man whose active hra'm 
dictated those notes. 


When the officers had completed 
their hasty examination of the body, 
they went to the telephone, and rang 
up Leo Frank's house. 

Newt Lee had already tried for sev- 
eral minutes to get a response from 
somebody at Frank's house, but had 
failed. The officers tried, long and 
earnestly, and they also failed. No 
one would answer. 


Before we go further, let us see 
what the official record proves, as to 
the moral character of Leo Frank, of 
whom the veracious Burns recently 
said — 

"And it made them angry when I offered 
$5,000 reward for the slightest evidence 
showing immorality in all of Frank's life. 
That offer still stands, and has never been 
sought — and still the stories continu,e in 
Georgia that he is a pervert. 

"I have never known a cleaner, more 
honest, more God-fearing man than Leo 
Frank. Only his abiding faith in his God 
has, according to my belief, kept him up 
through the ordeal he has experienced. 
And that faith will be rewarded, for he 
will be proven innocent." 

Burns' money, the "offered $5,000," 
is somewhat more unattainable than 
the bag of gold that you can get, if 
you will hasten to the end of the 
rainbow If anj'one was ever silly 
enough to become "angry," when 
Burns "offered $5,000 reward," 1 
never heard of it. To try to get blood 
out of a turnip, would be a sensible 
experiment, compared to an effort to 
get that money out of Burns. 

What says the record — leaving Jim 
Conley out of it — concerning Frank, 
than whom the garrulous Burns has 
never known "a cleaner, more honest, 
more God-fearing man?" 

The author of the Governor Slaton 
document says that 100 witnesses 
swore to Frank's good character, and 
less than a dozen testified he was 
lewd. The world is therefore ex- 
pected to believe, that the overwhelm- 
ing weight of the evidence was in 
favor of the chastity of the accused. 

Out of the hundreds of people who 
are acquainted with young men about 
town, how many really know their 
secret sins? How many could swear 
to anything disgraceful? 

When 100 Jews go upon the stand, 
and give Frank a good character, 
they no doubt are perfectly honest 
about it; but when ten white Gentile 
girls swear they had worked at the 
pencil factory for years, and that Leo 
Frank's character for lasciviousness 
was bad, the jury must not disregard 
this positive testimony, and rely upon 
the 100 negative witnesses. 

And when the cowering defendant 
dares not put a single question to 
those positive witnesses, their evidence 
against his character, hased on per- 
sonal knowledge^ must be accepted. 

Miss Myrtice Cato and Miss Mag- 
gie Griffin testified to Franlc's hahit 
of taking Rebecca Carson into the 
ladies'' dressing room., on the fourth 
floor, during work hours, and the 
attorneys of Leo Frank did not dare 



to ask those white girls a single ques- 

C. B. Dalton admitted, under oath, 
that he and Frank had frequently 
had a woman of the town in the fac- 

tory, and that ho had even gone to the 
basement with her. 

The woman from the outside, with 
whom Frank was alleged to have in- 
dulged in unnatural vice, was Daisy 




Hopkins, and the defense had to put 
her up. 

Daisy denied it, of course; and on 
cross-examination she gave the fol- 
lowing remarkable testimony: 

"I have never been in jail. Mr. W. 
M. Smith got me out of jail. 

"I don't know what they charged 
me with. They accused me of forni- 

However, when Jim Conley peeped 
through the key hole, and saw the 
sight which he swore he saw, you 
might read page 55 of the record, not 
for evidence of the guilt of Frank, 
but to obtain an idea of a pervert. 
If you will read the Old Testament 
account of the destruction of Sodom 
and Gomorrah, you will have a clear 
vision of the darker slime of this case. 
I do not care to quote the evidence, 
but merely cite you to the page. (You 
can find it also on page 285, 141st 
Georgia Eeports) 

So much has been said about 
Frank's chaste character — a pet of the 
Eabbi, a favorite of Cornell, a model 
husband, &c. — that I will give you a 
little glimp)se into Nellie Wood's evi- 

"Question: Do you know M: 

Ansuer: I worked for him two 

Q. Did 3^ou observe his conduct 
toward the girls? 

A. His conduct didn't suit me very 

Q. You say he put his hands on 
jou; is that all he ever did? 

A. Well, he asked me, one evening 
— I went into his oflfice, and he go;^ 
too familiar and too close. 

Q. Did he put his hands on you? 

A. Well, I did not let him com- 
plete what he started. I resisted him. 

Q. Did he put his hands on your 
breast ? 

A. No, but he tried to.. 

Q. Well, did he make any at- 
tempts on your lower limbs? 

A. Yes, sir.. 

Q. And on your dress? 

A. Yes, sir." 

Miss Nellie Wood quit, immediately, 
and never went back, except to get 
her pay for the two days. 

Miss Nellie Pettis gave testimony 
equally damaging. She told how 
Frank had leered at her, winked at 
her, showed her money, and finally 
asked, "What about it?" 

Miss Nellie's language was unusu- 
ally vigorous: she told Frank to go 
to hell! 

In a Good Shepherd house, in Cin- 
cinnati, there is a poor girl who 
worked for Frank, and he ruined her. 

In a Florence Crittenden Home, in 
Georgia, are two poor girls who 
worked for Frank, and he ruined 

How many other girls he ruined, he 
knows; but all that we know, is that 
the State produced eleven more that 
he wanted to ruin. 

Mary Phagan was another. 

(In the absence of the jury from the 
court-room, Judge Roan allowed the 
girl from Cincinnati to tell how 
Frank had debauched her; and how 
unnatural his manner of satisfying 
his passion was; and she spoke of a 
scar on her inner thigh made by his 

To understand what sort of creature 
the evidence in the case proved Frank 
to be, you would have to read some 
treatise on moral degeneracy — such a 
book, for example, as Psychopathia 


Had this sensual beast lusted after 
Mary Phagan? Did he make indecent 
overtures ? 

The record shows that he claimed 
not to know her at all. 

The point is immensely important. 
If he had known her, and shown an 
inclination for her, it is a damning 



circumstance, if he positively said- 
after she Tvas found dead in his place 
—that he did not know such a girl, 
^nd would have to consult his hooks. 

, DID HE know' her? 

Miss Kuth Robinson testified:^ 

"I have seen Leo Frank talldng to 
Mar}^ Phagan. 

"I heard him speak to her. He 
called her Mary." 

Miss Dewey Howell testified: 

"I have seen Mr. Frank talk to 
Mary Phagan two or three times a 
day, in the metal department. / have 
seen him hold his hand on her shoul- 
der. Be called her Mary?'' 

W. E. Turner testified: 

"I saw Leo Frank talking to Mary 
Phagan, on the second floor, about 
the middle of March. It was just 
before dinner. There was nobody else 
in the room. He stopped to talk to 
her. She said she had to go to work. 
He told her he ivas the Superinten- 
dent of that factory, and that he 
wanted to talk to her. 

''She hacked off, and he went on 
towards her, talking to her." 

Gantt also testified that Frank 
knew jSIary, by name. 

Had YOU been a juror in this case, 
could you have disregarded all that 
evidence as to Frank's personal 
knowledge of the girl? 

Believing the witnesses, and believ- 
ing that he wanted to make her a 
fresher Rebecca Carson — whom would 
you have suspected of the murder, 
when Frank brazened it out, all the 
way through, that he did not know 
that such a girl worked for him? 

Now, at this point, there comes an 
incident so natural in its occurrence, 
and so peculiar in its suppression, 
that I give it as a part of what hap- 

Frank had a cook named Minola 
McKnight, and her husband worked 
for the Beck-Gregg Hardware Com- 

pany. This man, Albert McKnight, 
told three white men, who were em- 
ployed at the same place, of some 
queer things which his wife, the cook, 
had told him, concerning what she 
had overheard in the Frank home. In 
consequence of what the cook's hus- 
band reported to the three white men, 
Minola was taken into custody, in the 
hope of getting valuable testimony 
out of her. She was detained at the 
station house two days, during which 
somebody employed a lawyer to rep- 
resent her. The upshot of the matter 
was, that Minola, in the presence of 
her attorney, made a statement which 
was reduced to writing, and sworn 
to by her, before a Magistrate of Ful- 
ton County. 


In his commutation of the sentence 
of Frank, the then Governor, Slaton, 
laid much stress upon Minola Mc- 
Knight's affidavit, alleging, in effect, 
that it was entirely false. 

You have a right to view that state- 
ment of the cook, in the light of all 
the surrounding circumstances, and to 
say how much moral weight you will 
give to it — for you are not bound by 
technical rules, and you are entitled 
now, to know all that occurred. 



In order that you may have a clear 
idea of this episode, it is necessary 
to remind you that Frank had hur- 
ried Mrs. 'White out of the factory, 
at about 1 o'clock; that Conley had 
gone on to his home; that Frank went 
out to his, and that Albert McKnight 
swears Frank remained only a few 
minutes, ate nothing, and hurried back 
toward the city. Albert told this to 
the white men he worked with, at the 
Beck, Gregg Hardware Company, 
before his wife was arrested. It 
seems that this information, given by 
the cook's husband, was one of the 
first independent pointers to Frank 
as tJie guilty man — independent of the 
circumstances immediately surround- 
ing the crime. 

At the station house, the cook re- 
fused to talk to the detectives; but 
after these black sheep had been igno- 
miniously sent away, the colored lady 
dried her eyes, composed her rumpled 
feelings, and spoke as follows: 

"Mr. Frank came for dinner, about 
half-past one, but Mr, Frank did not 
eat any dinner, and left in about ten 
minutes after he got there. 

"Mr. Frank came back to the house 
at seven o'clock that night. 

"Sunday morning I got there about 
eight o'clock, and there was an auto- 
mobile standing in front of the house, 
but I didn't pay any attention to it. 
(It was the automobile of the two 
police officers.) 

"I called them down to breakfast 
about half-past eight, and I found 
out that Mr. Frank was gone. (The 
policemen had carried him with them 
m their car.) 

"I did not hear them say anything 
at the breakfast table. After dinner, 
1 understood them to say that Mr. 
Frank and a girl were caught at the 
office Saturday. I don't know who 
said it. Mrs. Frank, Mr. Selig, Mrs. 
Selig, and Mr. Frank were standing 
there talking, after dinner, when they 

said it. / understood them to say it 
was a Jew girl.'''' 

This very remarkable statement of 
the cook would seem to prove two 
things; first, that she was not making 
up a tale, nor repeating one that her 
husband had made; and, second, that 
the family of Frank were bandying, 
to and fro, the words "Jew" and 
"Gentile," and the cook caught the 
word Jew, and got it wrong. 

They were no doubt conversing in 
low tones, and the colored lady was 
probably listening at the key hole. 
The mysterious automobile, the un- 
usual absence of Frank from Sunday 
breakfast, and the general stir in the 
family, could not have failed to 
arouse the colored lady's curiositj': 
hence her key-hole endeavors to 
acquire knowledge. 

The cook proceeds: "On Tuesday, 
Mr. Frank says to me, 'It's mighty 
bad, Minola ; I might have to go to 
jail about this girl, and I don't Imow 
a thing about it.' " 

If the cook's husband invented this, 
he is a most extraordinary inventor. 

The cook proceeds: "Sunday, Miss 
Lucile (Mrs. Frank) said to Mrs. 
Selig (her mother), that Mr. Frank 
didn't rest so good Saturday night; 
she said he was drunk, and wouldn't 

let her sleep with him She slept 

on a rug on the floor." 

"Miss Lucile said Sunday that Mr. 
Frank told her Saturday night that 
he was in trouble, and that he didn't 
know the reason why he would mur- 
der, and told his wife to get his pis- 
tol, and let him kill hmiself." 

Drinking so heavily that his young 
wife had to lie on the floor; tormented 
by the recollection of what he had 
done; unable, now, to comprehend 
how he could have done that cruel, 
cruel murder: calling for his pistol, 
that he might end it all ! 

Such is the scene which rises before 
you, as you reflect upon the cook's 



Invented? If so, whoever invented 
it should go to writing novels. A 
cook with that talent is hiding a 
big light under a small bushel. 

The cook proceeds: "I haven't 
heard Miss Lucile say whether she 
believed it or not. 

"/ donH know why Mrs. Frank 
didn't come to see her hush and (when 
he was in jail), hut it was a pretty 
long time hefore she would come to 
see him, MAYBE TWO WEEKS:' 

(It was nearer three weeks, before 
Mrs. Frank would go to see her hus- 

Answer: "Yes, sir." 

The cook signed her name, and took 
the oath, before G. C. February, 
Notary Public. The date was June 
3rd, 1913. 

I venture to say that every white 
man who has an intimate knowledge 
of the characteristics of negroes, will 
agree, that a negro cook, who had no 
grudge against her white folks, could 
never have been induced to fabricate 
such a tale as Minola told. It is too 
circumstantial. It gives away inside 
facts which no human brain could 


band — a circumstance to which 
Frank's partisans never refer.) 

In her affidavit, the cook swears 
that the Seligs paid her money, and 
told her to be careful how she talked. 
Before the notary took her oath to 
her statements, she was asked: 

"Has Mr. Pickett, or Mr. Craven, 
or Mr. Campbell, or mj'^self, influ- 
enced j^ou in any way, or threatened 
you in any way, to make this state- 

Answer: "No, sir." 

Question: "You make it of your 
own free will, and in the presence of 
your attorney, Mr. Gordon?" 

have invented. It hears the ear-marks 
of truth. 

What negro would ever have drawn 
that gruesome night picture of the 
young wife, lying on a rug, on the 
floor; and the young husband, drink- 
ing himself into stupefaction, wildly 
wondering how he came to murder; 
and calling for his pistol, that he 
might kill himself? 

The appearance which this dis- 
traught young man presented to the 
police officers.) next morning., was in 
exact accordance with his intoxicated 
condition the night hefore! 

The evidence of the two white men, 



Jolin Black and Woods Rogers, tallies 
precisely with that of the cook; and 
they had given their description of 
Frank's appearance and movements, 
Sunday morning, hefore they knew 
what the cook would swear ^ about his 
heavy drinking Saturday night. 


It is one of the most striking cor- 
roborations in the case. The cook 
told the truth in the affidavit; and if 
she lives until Frank dies, she will 
tell more. 

When the two officers went out to 
Frank's house, they had no suspicion 
of his guilt. They wanted him to see 
the girl, and if possible give them 
some clue to work on. They found 
him in the nervous, jerky, rickety 
state, natural to a man who had been 
drinking the night before. He asked 
whether anything had happened at 
the factor}', and was told that Mary 
Phagan had been found dead in the 

He makes no outcry of amazement 
and horror! He expresses no surprise 
at the crime. He utters no word of 

pity for the victim. He offers no in- 
formation to the policemen. He sug- 
gests no possible theory as to the 
criminal. He closes like a clam, 
shakes like an aspen, begs for a cup 
of coffee, refuses to look on the pallid 
face of the murdered girl, and denies 
that he knew Mary Phagan! 

To this climax of the case, we come 
by a strong, continuous chain of evi- 
dence, furnished by white witnesses, 
.not one of whom was impeached, or 
contradicted, and not one of whom 
was unfriendly to Fr<yik, if we ex- 
clude the girls he had tried to ruin. 




Consequently, it is impossible that 
you do not recognize in Leo Frank 
the man who had the lewd character 
needed in the criminal; the man who 
had shown a desire to possess this 
little girl; the man whose refusal to 
send her money, made it necessary for 
her to come for it; the man who had 
her in his possession and power at 
the time she disappears; the man — 
and the only, man — whom she asked 
about the metal room, and therefore 



the man — and the only man — who 
could have led her back there and 
shut the door, without arousing her 

It is impossible for you not to rec- 
ognize in Frank the only man who 
had the opportunity which the metal 
room afforded, when she asked the 
fatal question — ^"Has the new metal 

After he had accompanied the offi- 
cers to the morgue, and to the fac- 
tory, he returned home, and was there 
the remainder of the day, so far as 
the State knows. On Monday, he was 
at the factory, where of course excite- 
ment prevailed. 

All that day, while Barrett and 
others were talking of the blood- 
spots, and the hair, and were casting 
about for clues, nobody mentioned 
Frank as the possible criminal. No- 
body seems to have realized that he 
and Conley were the only two men 
who could have killed the girl. It is 
highlj^ probable that none of them 
knew that the doctors, and the under- 
taker would testify that the body had 
been lifeless for so long a time^ as to 
carry the murder hack to near the 
noon hour Saturday. 

These definite conclusions often 
ripen slowly — so slowly that we some- 
times wonder at our own blindness in 
not seeing them, at first glance. 

When the scientific evidence fixed 
the time of the crime somewhere near 
the noon hour, and the girl's stomach 
corroborated the doctors, the area of 
the investigation narrowed at once, to 
the exact time that Monteen Stover 
was in Frank^s vacant office. 

Taking the time when Mary was 
seen going toward the building, and 
only two blocks distant, we are driven 
to the conclusion that she had entered 
and disappeared hefore Monteen ar- 
rived : and that ^he was in the metal 
room, unconscious, while Monteen was 
waiting in the vacant office. 

Frank's partisans have to contend 

that Mary left him at that time., 
and went down stairs, on her way 

// so, xohy was she not seen hy Mon- 
teen Stover? 

But they contend that Conley seized 
her as she reached the foot of the 

Then, how came the hlood., and the 
hair., up stairs, and not down stairs f 

And would not Monteen, entering, 


have caught Conley in the act? 

She would have caught Frank in 
the act, had it not heen for the closed 
door of the metal room! 


Pardon me for dwelling more at 
length on the blood, up stairs, on 
Frank's floor. What is the official 
record as to this blood? 

J. N. Starnes testified : 

"I saw splotches that looked like 
blood ... some of which I chipped 
up. I should judge the area around 
those splotches was a foot and a half. 
It looked like a white substance had 



been swept over it. There is a lot of 
that white substance in the metal de- 

R. P. Barrett swore positively, "/^ 
was hloodr The spots were not there 
Friday: the largest was "four or five 
inches in diameter, with little spots 
behind these from the rear, six or 
eight in number." 

Mrs. George W. Jefferson was an- 
other worker in the metal depart- 
ment. She swore: 

"We saw the blood, Monday. It 
was about as hig as a fan^ and some- 
thing white was over it. 

"I didn't see the blood Friday. It 
was not painty 

N. V. Darley, manager ot a oranch 
of Frank's factory, testified: 

"Mr. Quinn called my attention to 
the hlood spots. Barrett called 
Quinn's attention to it. Barrett showed 
me some hair on a lever of the lathe. 

"/^ looked like an attempt had been 
m^ade to hide the (blood) spots. The 
white stuff practically hid the spots." 

What made the spots, and who 
tried to hide them? 

We narrow the investigation to 
Saturday, because three white wit- 
nesses swear the spots were not there 

Harry Denham and Arthur White 
did not go to the metal room: and 
none of Frank's visitors did, on Sat- 
urday, if ice leave out Mary Phagan. 

If we except Leo Frank and Mary 
Phagan, we are absolutely unable to 
trace anybody to the metal room, on 

Then, if the blood, and the hair, 
prove that at least two persons were 
in the metal room, Saturday; and if 
the evidence excludes the possibility 
of those two persons being other than 
Frank and Marj^; we are forced to 
the conclusion that these two went 
there; and, if one of the two died by 
violence, we can't escape the convic- 
tion <^hat the other did the killing. 

Of course, the State's theory is, 

that when Frank struck the girl, her 
fall, hackward and downward., was 
broken by the metal crank-handle of 
Barrett's machine;- and that this pro- 
jecting shaft tore out some of her 
hair, and ripped her scalp to the bone, 
inflicting the wound which ranged 
''''from down upward,^"* producing un- 

No other explanation can be given 
of two wounds simultaneously given, 
one in the face and the other on the 
back of the head. 

Governor Slaton declared that the 
body could not have reached the base- 
ment by the elevator. 

^Vhat difference does it make? 

The corpse was there; and no signs 
of a struggle, no signs of blood, no 
signs of torn-out hair, could be seen. 

On the contrary. Sergeant Dobbs 
testified that he saw the trace of the 
dragging of the body; and this trace 
led from the elevator., to where he 
found the girl. Her face was scratched 
and soiled, in exactly the way it would 
have been, had she been dragged by 
the heels. 

These surface abrasions of the skin 
were made after death, the doctors 
said : and there is no other way to 
account for them. 

So far afield have gone some of 
the Hessian theorists that they have 
argued the crime itself into the base- 
ment, where Cofiley, they say, held 
the girl's nose in a bank of cinders 
until she was smothered ! Yet here 
IS the official record which shows that 
there, was no accumulation of ashes 
or cinders in the basement, no ashes 
or cinders in the girl's nostrils or 
mouth; no ashes and cinders in her 
hands. The entire floor was just an 
ordinary dirt floor, gritty, of course, 
and with ashes and cinders sifted 
thinly on the surface, and trodden 
into the earth. 

What more did the criminal need, 
than the cruel cord, tied around 
her neck in a running noose — a cord 



large enough, and strong enough to 
strangle a horse? I have had that 
horrible thing in my possession, and 
I know what powerful twine it is. 
You could tie and hold a steer with it. 

As it was strangling the poor chihl. 
her tongue protruded from her mouth, 
half an inch — and there was no bruise, 
and no cinders on the tongue. 

No rapist, or murderer, could hold 
a strong girl's face buried in ashes 
and cinders, and kill her that way, 
without leaving indelible marks in 
the ashes and cinders, and without 
leaving indelible marks on the girl's 
front face — and on her neck, where 
his ruthless fingers gripped and held 

Is it not so? 

Upon this girl's neck, was no sign 
of ^dolence, save where the hemp cord 
buried itself in her flesh. 

No crueller mortal was ever insti- 
gated of the Devil, than the monster 
who roped that child's tender throat, 
and gloated over her as she died ! 

How did her body get to the base- 

It does not matter: for if she went 
there while alive, neither Frank nor 
Conley could have carried her, with- 
out the other knowing it; and if she 
went there dead, both were necessary 
for the work. 

There are only two ways of getting 
into the basement from the floor 
above: one is the elevator, and the 
other is the ladder. The foot of the 
ladder rests on the dirt floor, and it 
runs up to the hole covered by a trap 

How large is this hole? It is two 
feet square. The witnesses said that 
one person, at a time, could pass 
through this hole in the floor, and 
descend the ladder, but that it was a 
difficult matter. 

In other words, it was a tight 
squeeze for a grown man of average 
size to go down through this two-foot 
hole in the floor. 

That being the size of the opening, 
and that being its location, you can 
readily see that it is an awkward, 
troublesome job for a full-grown per- 
son to go to the cellar in that way. 

With the elevator, it is altogether 
different. To use it with ease, noth- 
ing more was needed than to unlock 
the power-box — and it was found un- 
locked Sunday morning! 

Consequently, whoever wanted to 
use it, Saturday, could do so; and the 
fact that it was found in usable con- 
dition Sunday, naturally inclines you 
to believe that it had been in use Sat- 

Is it not so? 

At all events, there was the elevator 
in condition to be used, with no other 
labor and difficulty than to open the 
door, step in, and pull the cable: the 
car would do the rest. But, with the 
other way of reaching the basement, 
there was a trap door to be lifted, 
and a ladder {not stairs) to descend; 
and when you give to any man the 
task of carrying a corpse weighing 
127 pounds down that ladder, you 
have assigned to him a labor not only 
most difficult, but decidedly danger- 
ous. The slightest loss of balance 
would have tumbled him off the lad- 
der, and imperiled his neck. 

Between the easy-going elevator 
and this hard-going ladder, which 
does your intelligence choose? Why 
not take the elevator? 

If my argument about the blood, 
and the hair, is sound, the elevator 
must be chosen, for you cannot sup- 
pose that the criminal toted the dying 
girl down stairs from the first floor. 
To have gone with her toward the 
front door, where a visitor was likely 
to enter any time, would have been 
sheer madness. 

But the elevator afforded secrecy, 
celerity, and noiselessness : no one 
could see what was in it, and no one 
could hear it, for the two carpenters 
on the fourth floor were not only en- 



gaged in the noisiest work, but were 
200 feet back from the elevator shaft. 

Even if there was a risk in the easy, 
swift use of the elevator, it was in- 
finitely less of a peril than to lift the 
corpse, and carry it down the stair- 
way, and then get it through the 
trap-door, and down the ladder. 

Why should we not do what a crim- 
inal in such a case would naturally 
do — follow the line of the least re- 
sistance, and adopt the safest, easiest, 
quickest method? 

Governor Slaton did not cross-ex- 
amine Leo Frank, or the accomplice, 
Jim Conley; but the Governor went 
to the factory, and travelled up and 
down in the elevator; and after hav- 
ing done so, declared that Mary Pha- 
gan's body could not have been taken 
to the basement by the elevator. Why 

Because (as he says) on Saturday 
morning, a soft substance (excrement) 
hed been deposited on the ground, in 
the shaft, and this excrement was 
found unmashed, Sunday. Wonderful 
Governor ! 

In the first place, the bottom of the 
shaft is uneven, and the elevator can 
rest upon the earth at one part, and 
not touch at others. In the second 
place, elevators do not always stop 
exactly at the bottom. In the third 
place, the elevator did not mash the 
excrement when the men -first went 
down in it, Sunday morning! 


Let us go back to the Monday, fol- 
lowing the Saturday of the crime. 

The city of Atlanta was seething 
with excitement: the factory was in a 
hubbub; the detectives and the police 
were scouring the earth to j&nd clues. 
Almost everybody suspected the night- 
watch to be the criminal. He was 
put under arrest, and he was man- 

Thafs what the Gentiles did, at the 

instance of Leo Frank, who intimated 
his belief in Newt Lee's guilt. 

What did the Jews do? 

They pussy-footed to the strongest 
team of lawyers in Atlanta, and 
secretly employed them to defend Leo 
Frank ! 

Be it remembered, always, that the 
rich Jews of Frank's immediate fam- 
ily and business connection, were the 
first to accuse him of this hideous 

Before the Gentiles had said one 
word against him, or taken any action 
against him, his own people had done 
what was never done, anywhere, at 
any time: 

They hired the most expensive law- 
yers, before there was a breath of 
Gentile accusation against this alleged 
martyr of '"''race hatred.''"' 

Wlien you reflect upon this fact, 
your mind will connect it with the 
story which the cook told her hus- 
band. The Seligs (the parents-in- 
law of Frank), of course, knew how 
Frank had raved that Saturday 
night: their daughter would have 
been unnatural if she had not spoken 
of the horror which possessed her, 
when that drunken husband was 
wildly talking of the murder, and 
calling for his pistol. 

As sure as God made the world, the 
Seligs communicated with the Mon- 
tags, and the Haas brothers, that 
very day; (the police had got them on 
the telephone just after finding the 
corpse), and they pussy-footed to the 
law firm of Rosser & Brandon — a firm 
soon to be augmented by the Gover- 
nor-elect, John M, Slaton. 
(Keep this detail in mind.) 
Consider the phenomenal situation ! 
There lies Mary Phagan at the 
morgue: there sits Newt Lee in jail, 
. with handcuffs on: there go Barrett, 
Standford, Mrs. Fleming, and others, 
showing the blood, and the hair: 
there goes Jim Conley, about his 
work as usual, in the same clothes he 



wore last Saturday; there goes Leo 
Frank, wlio has changed HIS clothes, 
and who tells the police that he 
doesn't believe that the night-watch 
has told all he knows; and there goes 
somebody to plant a hloody shirt 
* in the night-watchman's clothes bar- 
rel; and somebody fixes a time-slip 
which gives Lee time to have gone to 
his home during the night of the 
crime — and this is done after Frank 
had told the officers the time-slip was 
regularly punched; and it is Frank 
himself who, after the bloody shirt 
has been planted on Newt Lee''s prem- 
ises, urges the police to search those 
premises ! 

And during all that time, the best 
lawyers have been secretly engaged to 
defend Leo Frank — lawyers who will 
soon take into their firm the man 
whom the people had recently elected 
to be their Chief Magistrate! 

When the detectives lose faith in 
the bloody shirt — there was no Afri- 
can odor on it, and the blood was too 
evidently a recent smear inside and 
out — Frank has another shot in the 
locker. He tells the officers that J. M. 
Gantt had been intimate with Mary 
Phagan, and hints that he had been 
too intimate. He also informs them 
of Gantt's visit to the factory, Satur- 
day afternoon, to get two pairs of old 
shoes he had left there. Consequently, 
the excited police go and nab J. M. 

Thus the martyr of race hatred 
flings the meshes of suspicion around 
two innocent men, before he himself 
has been suspected by anybody, ex- 
cepting the rich Jews who had swiftly, 
stealthily employed for the martyr the 
supposedly ablest lawyers in Georgia; 

And so thoroughly uneasy are these 
rich Jews, that the Governor-elect is 
soon added to the Rosser firm — to the 
amazement of the political friends of 
John M. Slaton. 

To be exact, Rosser took the Gov- 
ernor-elect into his -firm in May, 1913. 

Mary Phagan was killed in April. 

To fully comprehend the infamous 
betrayal of the State of Georgia, by 
Governor Slaton, you must keep in 
your mind the astounding fact that 
he joined Rosser 's firm, after that firm 
had been employed to defend Frank, 
and had publicly taken part in his 

If an angel from Heaven should 
swear, on a stack of Bibles, that Sla- 
ton's partnership with Frank's lead- 
ing lawyers had nothing to do with 
his commutation of the sentence, you 
might possibly believe it. 

A Governor cannot practise law 
openly; and in June, 1913, John M. 
Slaton was to be inaugurated for a 
term of two years. 

Why, then, did he, in May, join a 
firm with which he could not openly 
act, until after June, 1915? 
■ And why did Rosser, in May, 1913, 
take in a partner whom he could not 
openly use, during the next two years ? 

Mark this: On Monday, Jim Con- 
ley and Frank came and went: Lee 
and Gantt were in limbo: others were 
suspected, and temporarily detained; 
and still, not a word was said against 
the Jew. His battery of lawyers was 
masked: nobody knew such a battery 
had been positioned: his Montags laid 
low : his Seligs were equally discreet. 

Suddenly, like a scene-shift on the 
stage, the officers turn to Leo Frank, 
and say, in substance, "We will have 
to interrogate you, Mr. Frank!" 

Then, the legal battery unmasks. 
Frank refuses to answer any ques- 
tions, until his Rosser comes! 

Innocent? When did conscious in- 
nocence ever play the game with 
trump cards up its sleeve? 

The crafty Frank knew from the 
first that the dogs would find his trail, 
socner or later; and he had not only 
prepared for the struggle by retaining 
crack lawyers, but he had kept sus- 
picion off Jim Conley, not even in- 



forming his own detective, Harry 
Scott, that Conley could write. 

Scott would not loiow the rudi- 
ments of his business, if he had not 
realized, early in his investigations, 
that if Frank was innocent, Conley 
was; and if Conley was guilty, Frank 

The thing is plain enough : put Conley 
at the foot of the stairs, and Frank at 
the top, and the girl going up or 
doicn the stairs., it is impossible for 
one of the men to seize the girl and 
do what was done to her, without the 
other man knowing it. 

The doors were open between Frank 
and Conley: the space separating them 
was inconsiderable: Conlej^ could not 
strike the girl in the face, and 
knock her down, without Frank hear- 
ing it ; whereas Frank could go with 
her back to the metal room, and close 
the door. 

Because of the certainty that, if 
Conley committed the crime, Frank 
knew it, Harry Scott and the police 
officers made every effort to find the 
criminal, in somebody else. Only as a 
last resort, did they turn to Conley. 

Keluctant to betray his boss, and to 
get himself into the trouble, Conley 
denied all knowledge of the crime; 
and went to pouring out lies, in true 
negro style. But the conviction grew 
that only he and Frank could be im- 
plicated, because only they had had 
the opportunity. 

Finally, the negro broke down, con- 
fessed, and ashed to he taken to 
Frank., so that the two could be heard 
to talk the matter over. 

.And the innocent martyr, a gradu- 
ate of Cornell, shrinks from meeting 
the ignorant negro, in the presence 
of witnesses. 

Yes ! The white man is afraid to 
face the hlack., who accuses him of 
the most heinous crime ever perpe- 
trated in the South. 

What was Frank's excuse for not 
facing the negro, and talking with 

him about how the little girl came to 
her death, in his place of business? 

His excuse was, that Rosser,was out 
of town. But Haas was not out of 
town, and Rosser's partners were 

However, the innocent martyr dared • 
not confront a guilty negro — a low- 
down, drunken brute, they call him — 
because Rosser was not present, to pre- 
vent the black brute from getting the 
better of the educated white gentle- 
man who was President of the At- 
lanta B'nai B'rith. 

And this is the same shrinking, 
cowering culprit who could not look 
at the dead girl's face, pretended not 
to know her, feared to ask eleven 
white ladies why they swore he had a 
lascivious cliaracter, and hid himself 
behind his legal immunity from cross- 
examination ! 

This is the victim of mob spirit, and 
race ^ hati'ed — this Jew whose rich 
Irinsmen stealthily hastened to hire 
lawyers before Q.ny Gentile had ac- 
cused him, and whose Jewish wife 
utterly refused to go to him for three 
iceeks after his arrest! 

There are some actions that speak 
like thunder claps: and the secret em- 
ployment of those lawyers, together 
with the abhorring avoidance of 
Frank by his own wife, are just such 

How, in the name of God, can any 
sane man believe him innocent, after 
weighing those two stupendous facts? 

THE JEWS closest to him, CON- 
DEMNED HIM, before the Gentiles 
even suspected him! 

It was not until the 29th of April 
that Frank was detained at police 
headquarters, to await the action of 
the Coroner's Jury. After a careful 
investigation of the case, Frank and 
Newt Lee were both held. Frank 
had testified at length under oath, 
and not one word of suspicion had he 
dropped on Jim Conley. He did not tell 
the Coroner that Conley was in the 



factory on Saturday, nor did he dis- 
close the fact tliat Conley could 

He did not utter a word that would 
clear Newt Lee, and give to that inno- 
cent darkey his freedom. 

He was perfectly content to screen 
Jim Conley, and to see the halter close 
upon the neck of Lee ! 

On May 24th, Frank was indicted 
by twenty-three grand-jurors, four of 
whom were Jews. (Not one of those 
official accusers has ever asked that 

attorneys moved for a new trial, 
which Judge Roan refused; and the 
case was appealed to the Supreme 
Court, which affirmed the Court be- 

The Supreme Court reviewed all of 
the evidence, at great length, and 
decided that it was sufficient to sus- 
tain the verdict. This decision appears 
in the 141st volume of Georgia Re- 
ports, and speaks for itself. 

Four of the six Justices held that 
the trial of Frank had been perfectly 
fair, and that he had been properly 


Frank's sentence of death be com- 
muted. ) 

On July 28th, 1913, Frank's trial 
commenced, before Judge L. S. Eoan, 
and a jury, selected jointly by the 
State and the accused. 

Until August 20th, the Court was 
hearing the evidence, and on that day 
tlie attorneys began their speeches. 
Five days later, the case Went to the 
jury, and on the same day, a verdict 
of "Guilty" was returned, without 
recommendation to mercy. On the 
next day, Judge Roan sentenced Frank 
to be hanged on October 10, 1913. His 

convicted. Two of the Justices dif- 
fered; and held that Judge Roan 
should not have permitted Conley, and 
several w^iite witnesses, to testify to 
the independent acts of immorality^ on 
the part of Frank. 

The decision, as published, shows 
that this was the on!}' question upon 
which our Supreme Court divided; 
and you can see that it was a point of 
minor importance. The real issue in 
the case was, whether Leo Frank mur- 
dered Mary Phagan, for the indict- 
ment did not charge him with rape. 

Consequently, Justices Fish and 











Beck went off on a spur track, and did 
not jump the rails on the main line. 

No matter how immoral the jurj'^ 
believed Frank to be, they were too 
intelligent to convict him of murdei^ 
on evidence of sexual vices. 

It is well for you to know ichat the 
Supreme Court divided on; because 
the public has had the fact of the 
divided court dinned into its ears, for 
more than a year, without having been 
told the comparative insignificance of 
the division. 

Neither has the public been told that 
when Frank's lawyers took the divi- 
sion of the Justices too seriously, and 
demanded a re-hearing of the case, the 
Supreme Court unanimously refused 
it. This of itself proves that the dis- 
senting opinions of Justices Fish and 
Beck left no deep impression even on 
their own minds. 


With an effrontery hard to compre- 
hend and sufficiently condemn, it has 
been stated, again and again, that the 
State of Georgia has no court that can 
review the evidence in a criminal case ! 
Every volume of our Supreme Court 
decisions (Georgia Reports) proves 
the audacity and shamelessness of the 
falsehood, first published by C. P. 
Connolly, and finally by the Governor 
who commuted the sentence. So far 
is the statement from being true, that 
in practically every motion for a new 
trial, there are three stereotyped 
grounds which are argued before the 
Supreme Court; towit, that the ver- 
dict is against the evidence, that the 
verdict is against the weight of the 
evidence, and that the verdict is un- 
supported by the evidence. While, of 
course, these three stereotyped grounds 
are realh'^ but one^ the fact that they 
are almost always made, and passed 
on hy the Supreme Court, shows that 

this highest of State tribunals is con- 
stantly revieAving the evidence — weigh- 
ing it, measuring it — and deciding 
whether it shows the defendant's guilt 
beyond a reasonable doubt. 

If, in 'the opinion of the Court, thfe 
evidence fails to do this, the judge 
below is reversed, and a new trial 

When C. P. Connolly stated in Gol- 
lier'^s, that the Supreme Court of 
Georgia had no such power as this, it 
was possible to explain his mendacity 
upon the assumption of his ignorance; 
but when Governor John M. Slaton 
used almost the same words, in sav- 
ing the neck of his guilty client^ no 
such excuse can be made for him. Ee 
lied, icith deliberation and Tnoral 

On page 247, of the 141st Volume 
Georgia Reports, you may read the 
20th head-note of the Supreme Court's 
decision in the Frank case: 

"20. The evidence supports the ver- 
dict, and there was no abuse of dis- 
cretion in refusing a new trial." 

In the body of the decision, page 
284, you may find these words: 

"20. The record is voluminous. . . . 
We have given careful consideration 
to the evidence, and we believe the 
same to be sufficient to uphold the ver- 
dict, and as no substantial error was 
committed in the trial of the case, the 
discretion of the Court in refusing a 
new trial will not be disturbed." 

In two other cases, reported in this 
same volume, the Supreme Court was 
asked to review the evidence against 
the defendant, and to decide whether 
it showed guilt beyond a reasonable 
doubt. The cases are those of Brown, 
and Hart, both murder cases; and the 
Court held that the evidence must 
demonstrate the guilt of defendants 
beyond a reasonable doubt. That is a 
maxim, a standing rule, an invariable 
principle with our Supreme Court; 
and every Georgia lawyer knows it. 




Tiie decision of our highest court 
vvas supposed to settle the Frank c?se. 

Such a decision has alwaj^s been 
taken as final, except in extraordinary 
cases, where new evidence developed 
after the trial — evidence which might 
have caused a different verdict, and 
which could not have been discovered 
before the trial, by the use of diligent 

Here it was that Burns came roar- 
ing into the case, airily assuming' 
that it had never been tried. Burns 
blotted out the trial judge, the jury, 
and the Supreme Court. Burns made 
a calliope of himself, and every re- 
sounding note he struck echoed deaf- 
eningly through the Atlanta dailies, 
and through the Northern papers 
owned by the Jews, and by William 
Randolph Hearst. Burns ostentati- 
ously visited the pencil factory, jiist as 
though he had recent!}^ discovered its 
whereabouts; and he sleuthed over the 
premises with unearthly skill and sub- 
tlety, just as though the crime had 
been committed the day before. After 
running up and down the stairs; and 
poking his nose first in one room, and 
then in another; and travelling back 
and forth in the elevator; and cannily 
boring holes into everybody with his 
all-knowing ej'es. Burns came forth to 
the reporters and yelled into their 
eager ears the startling discovery he 
had made! 

He had discovered — the blatant ass 
had actually discovered, that the crime 
was the work of a pervert of the low- 
est type, and this pervert was a man 
that^'no one had even suspected ! He, 
Burns, meant to locate that unsus- 
pected man, demonstrate his guilt, and 
overwhelm the Pinkerton Detective 
Agency, and the Atlanta police. He, 
Burns, was "utterly confident," he 
would lay his hands on this unsus- 
pected pervert, and, by proving his 
guilt — Burns felt sure he would con- 

fess — he would show what boobies the 
Pinkertons, and Atlanta police, had 
been, when they arrested Newt Lee, J. 
M. Gantt, Jim Conley, and Leo Frank. 

Never in my life, have I known any 
man to make as much noise as Burns 
made; and never have I known the 
daily papers turn themselves into 
sounding boards, fog-horns, and mega- 
phones for anybody^ as willingly as 
they did for this empty, vociferous, 
and pestilent scoundrel, William J. 

There is just this much to be said 
to the credit of his intelligence: he 
then saw the same thing that Harry 
Scott had seen; towit, he couldn't im- 
plicate Jim Conley (at the foot of the 
stairs) without implicating the white 
man^ at the head of the stairs. Burns 
saw what any sane man ought to have 
seen, that the crime could not steer 
clear of both the white man and the 
negi'o, lohen they were so close to- 
gether, and each knew of the other's 
presence, and each loiew of the pres- 
ence of the girl. 

If she left Frank, she went to Jim, 
almost in Frank's presence: if she did 
not go to Jim^ she never left Frank! 

Even an asinine pseudo-detective, 
like Burns, could see that. 

The only people who do not see it, 
belong to the class who, having eyes, 
see not. 

Burns knew that Frank — if innocent 
— would have said, at the very begin- 

"The girl must have been assaulted 
and killed, almost immediately after 
she left my office; and as nobody but 
Jim was at the foot of the stairs, Jim 
did it. Go and nab Jim ! Don't bother 
with Newt Lee! Don't arrest J. M. 
Gantt ! Don't search Lee's premises 
for a blood-stained garment. 

"Seize Jim ! Search his premises. 
Jail the woman he lives with. Ques- 
tion them, separately. Compel Jim to 
tell what became of Marj^, after Mary 
left my office, for she never reached the 



door; she was stunned, assaulted, and 
strangled inside my place; Jim and I 
were the only men in the house who 
could havejcnoicn the girl was there^ 
and who could have made the attack 
on her; and, as I did not do it, JIM 


Oh, gentlemen, gentlemen! use 
your common sense ! Isn't that what 
you would have said, had you been 
where Frank was, and none of that 
little maiden's blood reddened ijour 

What's the use of publishing false- 
hoods about Georgia laws, Georgia 
courts, and Georgia people, when one 
of our children lies in her untimely 
grave, and the record-evidence so 
plainly proves the infernal guilt of 
the man whom Rosser's partner, John 
iM. Slat on, rescued from Biblical pun- 
ishment ? 

Burns knew that had Frank been 
innocent, he would have put Harry 
Scott, and the other officers, on the 
trail of Jim Conley, instead of Newt 
Lee; and Frank would have told the 
detectives that he recognized Conley''s 
writing in those notes; and that it was 
Conley who must have grabbed the 
girl as she reached the bottom of the 
stairs ! 

Burns isn't altogether a nin-com- 
poop : and he therefore knew that the 
screening of Jim Conley by Leo 
Frank, meant exactly the same as the 
screening of Leo Frank by Jim Con- 
ley, towit — that they tver^e both guilty. 

Consequently, Burns went roaring 
into the North to find his pervert 
''who is still at large." 

There is evidence in the record 
which shows that Burns tried to make 
a dummy out of a Chicago darkey 
named Allen. It appears that Burns 
pretended to be mysteriously turning 
the earth over, in Cincinnati. From 
time to time. Burns vigorously smiled, 
upon mankind, and fog-horned the 
information that he was making "most 
gratifying progress" in his sleuthing 

after that elusive pervert who had 
never been suspected. 

We were told that Burns was com- 
piling a mightj' document, as he went 
along, and this dj^namic document — 
as he vociferously shouted — would 
clear Leo Frank. 

Naturally, Burns got on our nerves. 
He stayed there. We became obsessed 
with Burns. He agitated our reflec- 
tions, disturbed our digestions, and 
monopolized our dreams. I never saw 
anything like it. The expense account 
of the Haas Finance Committee would, 
in my judgment, be more interesting 
than any human document that could 
be found this side of Jerusalem. 

But all things must have an end; 
and even the Burns peregrinations 
and vociferations had to reach their 
final show-down; and when Burns' 
famous report came into view, it was 
nothing in the world but another 
argument — and a sorry one — on the 
evidence in the record ! 

Whichever way he turned. Burns 
ran against an impassible wall. It 
was the resource of desperation, when 
they fixed upon Conley as the only 
criminal : they did not do it, until there 
was nothing else to do! And they 
could never have "got away with it," 
if Rosser had not had a partner in 
the executive of ice. 


In his very long, and very inco- 
herent defense of himself. Governor 
Slaton urged the importance of what 
he called soihe newh^-discovered evi- 
dence. That trumped up stuff was 
made the basis of an extraordinary 
motion for a new trial; and when 
Judge Benj. H. Hill overruled it, the 
case again went to our Supreme 
Court, which unanimously decided 
against the defendant. 

Not until he had twice gone to the 
highest State court, with nearly 200 
diiferent assignments of error, did 



Frank raise the point that he was 
not present, in person, when his law- 
years waived his appearance, and re- 
ceived the verdict. 

Judge Roan knew of the intense, 
but repressed feeling in Atlanta; and 
he feared that this feeling might 
escape control, if the defendant was 
acquitted. Suffering from the can- 
cer which took his life not long 
afterwards, and worn down by the 
terrific strain of the trial. Judge 
Roan was naturally nervous, and ap- 
prehensive. But, as a matter of rec- 
ord, it was proved that he had noth- 
ing tangible to base his anxiety upon, 
for the Sheriff — who has, for some 
cause, been Frank's champion — testi- 
fied that there had never been any 
disturbance, no mob, no mob threats, 
&c. — and a score of deputies and other 
citizens swore to the same thing. 

No evidence to the contrary could 
he ohtained. 

Remember, in this connection, that 
ex-Governor Brown, in his statement 
to Governor Slaton, said that certain 
gentlemen had brought him vague ru- 
mors of an intended moh; and that on 
the strength of these vague rumors, he 
had requested that some of the offi- 
cers and soldiers of the National 
Guard sleej) at the armory that night. 

Ex-Governor Brown further stated 
that he caused the Mayor to have 
the city scouted, in automobiles, and 
that there was absolutely no sign of 
any mob, anywhere. Not as many as 
three men could be found bunched 

Therefore, all the wild- talk about 
mobs, and the holding of the military 
in readiness, frittered away into 
'•vague rumors," which led the Gov- 
ernor to request that a few soldiers 
sleep where they could act quickly, if 

The lawyers of Frank made out a 
narrative of mob demonstrations, and 
mob pressure, drawing upon their 
imagination with prolific liberality. 

They carried this before Judge Wil- 
liam Newman, of the Federal Court, 
on a writ of habeas corpus^ which 
took the defendant out of the custody 
of the State. Losing before the At- 
lanta Judge, the lawyers persisted, 
until they got the case before the Su- 
preme Court of the United States. 

On April 19th, 1915, a decision was 
rendered against Frank, seven of the 
Justices holding that all the alleged 
facts as to mob violence had been car- 
ried before the Supreme Court of 
Georgia, and had been considered by 
that court "at times and places, and 
under circumstances wholly apart 
from the atmosphere of the trial, and 
free from any suggestion of mob 
domination, or the like; and the facts 
were examined, not only upon the 
affidavits and exhibits submitted in , 
behalf of the prisoner . . . but 
also upon the rebutting affidavits sub- 
mitted in behalf of the State, and 
which., for reasons not explained., he 
has not included in his petition.'''' 

The seven Justices, therefore, held 
that, as Frank's lawyers had failed 
to include in their pleadings the evi- 
dence upon which Judge Hill, and 
our Supreme Court had based their 
decisions, the United States Supreme 
Court must assume that the Georgia 
courts had reached a righteous de- 
cision on the question of mob vio- 

The seven Justices of the United 
States Supreme Court evidently sus- 
pected that the counter-showing ., as 
to the existence of the alleged mob 
violence at the trial, must be con- 
clusive, else Frank's attorneys would 
not have been afraid to let the Court, 
and the country., see how crushingly 
the State replied to those belated and 
manufactured charges. 

The seven Justices cited numerous 
cases, in which our Supreme Court 
had granted new trials because of 
moh violence; and one of these was 
that Will Myers, THE JEW, who 



brutally murdered Crowley^ near At- 
lanta, and who made a suspicious 
escape from the jail. If alive, he is 
yet roaming the earth, a free man — 
in consequence of the extreme jeal- 
ousy of Georgia's highest court in 
seeing to it, that even the guiltiest 
wretch shall be given a fair trial. 

But it is said that two Justices of 
the United States Supreme Court dis- 
sented. So they did — but upon what? 

Justice Holmes, speaking for him- 
self and Justice Hughes, took the 
entire statement of Frank's lawyers 
as true — prima facie — and taking it 
to be the truth, those members of the 
Court held— 

"Upon allegations of this gravity, 
it (Frank's petition) ought to he 
heard^'' by the Federal . Courts, al- 
though it had already been heard 
and decided by the State Courts. 
Justices Holmes and Hughes held 
that it was proper to decide against 
the State, without seeing the Stateh 
side of the case,' and fo treat as null 
and void a State-Court decision, he- 
cause of an ex-parte attack upon it! 

I don't think many good lawyers 
will accept that as good law; and 
such a principle certainly antagonizes 
all previous decisions. The seven Jus- 
tices merely followed precedent: to 
have ordered the re-trial, in the Fed- 
eral Courts, of an issue of fact^ which 
the State Courts had already tried, 
and decided adversely to the defend- 
ant, would have been revolutionary. 

But it is sufficient to remind the 
unprofessional reader, that Justices 
Hughes and Holmes went no further 
than to decide that, taking the alle- 
gations of mob violence to be true, 
Frank had a right to be heard on 
that point. And the professional, as 
well as the unprofessional reader will 
be surprised to learn, that Frank had 
been fully heard on that very point — 
and that the record shows that there 
wasn't a particle of merit in the point. 

Why? Because there was no evidence 
to support it. 


You will have noticed that I have 
discussed the case, upon the testimony 
of the unimpeached white witnesses, 
without using Jim Conley at all. 

Let us now consider the negro, 
who has been so widely and violently 
assailed by the Frank partisans. 

What are the facts, as shown in 
this official record? They are, that 
Conley has been continually at work 
for white men, in Atlanta, and that 
he never had any trouble with any 
white person; nor was he ever a con- 
vict, except for thirty days, when he 
was sentenced in the police court for 
fighting another negro. In 1904, Jim 
had a row with a darkey, and was 
fined $1.75, which he paid. In 1905, 
he paid the same fine, for the same 
luxury. In 1906, they raised the 
price on him, and fined him $3.75, 
which he paid. In 1907, he had two 
fusses, and paid $26 for the brace. 
Finally, in 1912, he was given a sen- 
tence of thirty days. 

At that time, he was in the employ 
of Leo Frank. 

There is no evidence that he had 
ever been accused of violating a 
State law, much less convicted of 
any crime. The record shows that 
Conley had been a steady, regular 
worker at the pencil factory, for two 
years; and, in that length of time, 
Frank and his associates had found 
no serious fault with the negro. He 
was accused of borrowing nickels 
and dimes, which he was slow to 
repay; and one gentleman who had 
had occasion to send Jim for a pot of 
beer, swore he wouldn't believe Jim on 
oath: "I have had no confidence in 
him since he put water in my beer." 
So, you see, there is really nothing of 



importance that they could prove 
against the negro, and you may be 
sure they left no stone unturned. 
Then, what is the gist of his evi- 
dence ? 

It is, that he saw two girls go 
up stairs, and only one come down: 
Mary went first, and Monteen fol- 
lowed; and Monteen remained up 

head of the stairs, looking wild and 
excited; and that P>ank asked him if 
he had seen a girl come up stairs, and 
Jim answered, "I seed two go up, 
but I ain't seen but one come down." 
Tiien Frank told him that he had 
tried Mary in the metal room, and 
that she had resisted, and he had 
struck her, and "I guess I hit her 


stairs quite a little bit, and then came 
back down and went away; and that 
he had already heard steps like two 
persons walking back to the metal 
room, just before Monteen came in; 
and that, after Monteen left, some one 
came running to the front up stairs 
on tip-toes; and then he heard the 
"stomp" that Frank always made 
when he was signalling Jim about a 
woman ; and that he answered the 
signal, and found Frank near the 

too hard;" and that she had struck 
something as she fell. 

Frank told the negro he must help 
get the body to the basement; and 
the negro went to where the girl was 
lying on her back, with hands and 
arms up. 

Frank had torn a strip from her 
underclothing, had folded it, and had 
placed it under her head — and that 
blood-clotted ]:)ioce of undergarment 
had its tremendous weight with the 



jury, for it accounted for there being 
no blood on the floor beneath the 
hair on the lever she had struck in 

Jim picked up the body, carried it 
a few steps, and dropped it, near the 
dressing room, and the hlood spat- 
tered., as her head again hit the floor. 

Frank had to help Jim with the 
body, and they carried it to the ele- 
vator, the key of which Frank, hur- 
ried to his office and got. They took 
her to the basement, and left her 
right there by the elevator, from 
which Sergeant Dobbs afterwards saw 
the signs of dragging commence. 

Frank was so excited, that he ran 
up the ladder, telling Jim he would 
catch the elevator as it passed him on 
the floor above. This he did. 

Then they were in Frank's office, 
and Frank talked excitedly, ram- 
blingly, and, all at once, exclaimed — 

"TV^y should I hang? I have rich 
people in Brooklyn!" 

(At that time, and at the time Jim 
told the police of this, the negro did 
not know, that Frank had any wealthy 
kinspeople anywhere.) 

Then Frank asked Jim to write the 
notes, and the negro wrote four, two 
of which seemed to suit Frank; and 
he put them all in his desk. He gave 
Jim money, but took it back, saying 
he would attend to that later. He 
outlined a scheme by which the negro 
was to take the crime upon himself, 
promising to get him out on bond, 
and spirit him away. He made Jim 
promise to return that afternoon, and 
help him to dispose of Mary's body. 
Then they left the building, Jim go- 
ing for a drink of beer in a near-by 
saloon, and then walking homeward 
with Ivie Jones. At home, Jim got to 
thinking about what had happened, 
and he was afraid to go back to the 
factory. Nor was he there Sunday, 
but he turned up as usual Monday 

In the two notes found lying beside 

the dead girl, she was made to tell 
her mother who it was that attacked 
her, and to explain how her tody got 
to the hasement. She said that as she 
went to the toilet (Franlc's floor 
toilet!) the night watchman seized 
her, and flung her down the scuttle- 
hole. Notice the wild confusion which 
raged in the mind of the real author 
of the notes! He puts the place of 
the deadly assault right where it oc- 
curred; but postpones the time of the 
crime until night, when Newt Lee will 
be on duty. He doesn't realize the 
difficulty of explaining how Mary was 
kept in the building, from about noon 
until dark; but he does realize that he 
must try to account for the corpse 
being in a place the girl had never 

So, in one breath, he put the girl at 
the toilet, near the hlood and the hair; 
and in the next, he has her flung 
down the ladder, into the basement, 
where no hlood and no hair could he 

Now, if you can believe the blood 
and the hair made their way per- 
versely from the basement to near the 
toilet, to which., as Frank told the 
jury, he might have gone unconsci- 
ously, you may also believe that a 
negro, having committed the crime, 
seated himself by the corpse, in a dark 
cellar, to write notes of explanation to 
the girl's mother. 

Eobust animals, like Conley, do not 
commit the crime of Sodom: that is 
the vice of the degenerate, and Leo 
Frank''s face looks the part to perfec- 
tion ! 

Consequently, such a robust and 
natural negi'o as Conley, would be 
almost the last man you could imagine 
as the author of the notes in which 
unnatural intercourse with, that little 
white girl is suggested. 

Now, let us put our mother-wit to 
work on this negro witness. 

AVhen the record discloses that he 
had worked two years for Leo Frank, 



we must assume that a .certain inti- 
macy and confidence had been estab- 
lished between the two. 

When we learn from disinterested 
white witnesses, that Frank had had 
women of the town to visit the fac- 
tor}', during business hours, and on 
Saturday afternoons, we are bound 
to believe that the negro knew of it, 
because his place was near the front 

Wouldn't Frank, who was afraid of 
his Uncle Montag, want someone to 
keep a watch-out for him, when these 
lewd women darted in and out? Nat- 
urally. Then, who would serve his 
purpose better than this submissive 
negro ? 

But, let us come directly to the 
question which goes to the bowels of 
the matter: 

What evidence did the State have 
on Jim Conley, when he at length 
broke down^ and confessed? 

The State had none — absolutely 
none — except that three outsiders had 
seen a negro, whom they did not 
know, occupying a seat where Jim 
usually sat. 

In other words, the State had no 
more evidence against Jim than it 
had against Frank, towit — that he 
was in the factory on Saturday. 

Therefore, when the negro con- 
fessed, he gave evidence which the 
State had been unable to get; and, if 
he had kept his mouth shut, Newt Lee 
might have suffered. After all, the 
dead body was found where Lee alone 
had been, for nine-and-a-half houi^s; 
and the forged time-slip did show a 
gap of an hour, and his clothes-barrel 
did hold a blood-stained sliirt which 
might be his. Therefore, excited 
minds might suspect his guilt — especi- 
ally if the person who planted that 
shirt would also swear he saw Mary 
Phagan on the streets, Saturday after- 

That Frank, and his partisans were 
dead-set against the innocent Newt 

Lee, is shown by their desperate effort 
to prove, by a prostitute, that she 
passed the pencil factory Saturday 
afternoon, and heard a woman's 
scream ! 

Remcmher^ that all of this horrible 
work against an innocent negro, was 
in full progress, at the time Coaley 
made his confession. 

In other words. Newt Lee {accused 
in the notes) was being "framed up," 
by Frank and his lawyers, when Con- 
ley blocked the hideous scheme by his 

Eemember, also, that Haas, the law- 
yer, and Montag, the principal owner 
of the factory, had both been told over 
the telephone, by the police, of the 
finding of the corpse — told at the same 
time that the policemen were persist- 
ently trying to get Frank, on the tele- 
phone. They could hear the 'phone 
buzz and ring at the other end, but no 
response came from Frank's house. 

Now, another thing: Suppose the 
undenied facts are inconsistent with 
the theory that any negro committed 
fho crime! 

Did any black assailant of a white 
woman ever go looking for a cord 
with which to strangle her, when his 
fingers were already on her throat? 

Did any black assailant of a white 
woman ever choke her to death, and 
then reverently fold her hands across 
her breast? Never! 

Did a black rapist, and murderer 
of a white girl ever seat himself near 
her, to write four notes to her mother? 

Did such a negro criminal ever re- 
turn to the scene of his crime, and go 
about his work as usual? Never! 

Then, the conclusion which fixes 
itself in your mind is, that whoever 
used the cord was not a negro; and 
whoever folded those pulseless hands 
across the child's bosom, and wrote 
the notes to her mother, was not the 
principal perpetrator of the crime; 



and if the negro afterwards came and 
Avent about the i)reniises, as if nothing 
had occurred, he did not assault the 

Let us view it from another stand- 
point : 

If there are undisputed facts in the 
case which cannot be explained out- 
side of Jim Conley's testimony, are 
we not safe in taking his evidence to 
that extent? 

The undisputed facts which cannot 
be cleared up, without the aid of the 
negro's story, are these: 

(1.) There was no blood on the 
floor under the bench-lathe, where the 
hair was found; 

(2.) There was blood, a few steps 
distant, in the next room; 

(3.) There was a cloth, stained 
with blood, hanging loosely around 
the girl's neck; 

(4.) Her hands were decently 
crossed upon her bosom, and so rig- 
idly fastened there, that they did not 
fall apart, when the corpse was 
dragged by the heels, 125 feet over a 
dirt floor which scarified her face. 

The negro told the jury how he 
found Mary's body, with a piece of 
cloth under her head, "like to catch 
the blood." The jury saw the cloth, 
and the jury knew that no black man 
ever killed anybody, and then folded 
a strip of cloth, torn from the dress, 
to catch the blood. // not used to 
soak up the hlood, why was the cloth 
loosely tied around the head? 

The negro explained now he dropped 
the hea^^ corpse, in passing the dress- 
ing room, and thus spattered the floor 
with blood. 

The negro told the jury, quite sim- 
ply, and without knowing the vast 
psychological value of his statement^ 
that he "put her hands down^'' and 
folded them across her bosom. Did 
uny man ever do that^ for anj^ victim 
of his lust? Never in God''s world! 

Now, when you consult the evi- 
-dence of other witnesses, and find 

that the girls arms remained in that 
position,, as she was being dragged on 
her face, your intelligence drives you 
to the conclusion, that her arms be- 
came rigid, in that position, long 
he fore she was dragged. 

Then, you are pushed back to the 
story the negro told — the story of 
Frank's calling to him for help; the 
cloth imder the bleeding head; the 
carrying of the corpse to the elevator; 
the leaving of it, on its back, in front 
of the elevator shaft, with the arms 
crossed as Jim had put them, up 

Take Jim's story, and every khik 
untangles, every crease smoothes out: 
reject it, and there are undisputed 
facts in the record which no human 
ingenuity can explain. 

Isn't this itself a most powerful 
corroboration of Jim's evidence? 

Given essential facts which impera- 
tively call for explanation, and which 
nobody can explain without the 
negro's help — what follows? 

As sane people, we must accept the 
negro, to that extent. 

If we accept him as to those unex- 
plained, and otherwise unexplainable 
facts, we need not bother our heads 
about other details of his evidence: 
we have enough to understand the 
crime., and to identify the criminal. 

And when you remember that one 
of these two men, Frank and Conley, 
successfully withstood a cross-exam- 
ination of eight hours, while the other 
refused to he cross-examined at all, 
your mind gravitates to the story of 
the man who was vainly assailed by 
the prolonged cross-examination. 

No suspicious tactics had to be used 
in behalf of Jim Conley. No cook 
swore against him, in the presence of 
her attorney, and then took it back. 
No prostitute had to be spirited away 
from Atlanta oil his account. No 
poor old preacher was paid $200 to 
make a false affidavit for him; and 
nobody acting in his behalf endeav- 



ored to bribe, and to intimidate the 
State's witnesses. 

During the entire two years that 
have passed since Conley confessed, 
not a single bit of evidence has been 
discovered against him, other than 
that which he voluntarily gave against 

And during that whole period, the 
hirelings of Big Money have never 
been able to unearth a scintilla of tes- 
timony in favor of Leo Frank. 

Circumstantial evidence is sufficient 
to convict, when a crime is proved^, 
and all other possible persons are ex- 
cluded, save the prisoner at the bar. 

In this case, the guilt of Frank can 
be shown on two lines, independent 
of each other. The negro's corrob- 
orated testimony does it; and the cir- 
cumstantial evidence, without the 
negro, does it. 

The twenty-three grand jurors 
thought so, and never changed their 
opinion. The twelve trial jurors 
thought so, and never changed their 
opinion. Judge Roan at least thought 
the jury was justified in its opinion, 
for he refused to disturb the verdict; 
and he never told anybody, or wrote 
anybody to the contrary. And the 
Supreme Court thought the same way, 
for it sustained both the judge and the 


Xever before did we have outside 
influences brought to bear upon us, in 
our enforcement of law. We have 
tried Jews and Gentiles; rich men and 
poor men; white men and negroes; 
and we have put many a man to death, 
after j^recisely the same sort of pro- 
cedure that was had in Frank's case. 

Why was Frank made an excep- 
tion? AVhy was he singled out for a 
national crusade against the State 
of Georgia. Why did New York 
preachers, and laymen get excited in 

behalf of this particular convict? 
Why did Chicago people turn their 
backs upon all the condemned mur- 
derers of the West, and come Pullman- 
earring down to Atlanta for Leo 
Frank? When, before, did gover- 
nors, and legislatures of other States 
assume that they knew more about 
our business than we ourselves knew? 
When, before, did the Jew papers, the 
L. & N. Railroad papers, and the 
Hearst papers arrogate to themselves 
the right to treat a carefully adjudi- 
cated case, as if it had never been 
legally decided? 

(The Louisville & Nashville Rail- 
road belongs to the Rothschilds, of 
whom the New York Jew, August 
Belmont, is the American agent. It 
was the baleful influence of this L. 
& N. system that debauched Kentucl^y 
and Tennessee politics, caused the 
assassination of Goebel and Carmack,. 
and is now the power behind the 
throne in Georgia.) 

What is to become of Law and 
Order, in any State, when outsiders 
claim the right to dictate to it? 

After this case had gone the way 
of all others, the rich Jews formed a 
Finance Committee, headed by Haas 
of Atlanta, Contributions were poured 
into its treasury; and even the Jewish 
clerks were assessed on their wages. 
The Burns Detective Agency spent 
money like water — its own money, of 
course; and, in every direction, law- 
yers, politicians, and hack-writers were 
enlisted. Frank belonged to the Jew- 
ish aristocracy, and it was determined 
by the rich Jews that no aristocrat of 
their race should die for the death of 
a working-class Gentile — "nothing but 
a factory girl." 

The most outrageous misrepresenta- 
tions were published broadcast 
throughout the country; and as none 
of the Atlanta dailies would allow 
am^body to defend the State, the re- 
peated and undenied accusations were 
believed by millions of people whose 



vconimon sense should have suggested 
to them that, no Southern jury has 
ever convicted a tchite man on the sole 
evidence of a negro. 


The reason why sentiment in Geor- 
gia crystalized against Frank was, 
that I laid before the people the plain 
facts as they are preserved in the 
official record; and the reason why so 
many honest people in other States 
have misunderstood the case, and mis- 
judged our Courts is, that the par- 
tisan pamphlets were believed to con- 
tain the truth. 

If the record had agreed with the 
pamphlets, what was the need of so 
many pamphlets? 

If the record failed to disclose any 
-convincing evidence of Frank's guilt, 
why was it never published? 

There is but one reply: 

The record does show the man's 
:guilt, and hence they could not 
print it. 

You may be asked. Why did not the 
State publish the Brief of Evidence? 
In the first place, the Governor was a 
member of the law-firm which was 
-getting the biggest fee for saving 
Frank's life. But, in any event, it is 
not to be expected that a sovereign 
State will appear as defendant at the 
'bar of public opinion when arraigned 
by a Haas Finance Committee, a rot- 
ten Detective Agency, a regiment of 
fee'd lawyers, and a pack of nonde- 
script publicists. 

A sovereign State may well main- 
tain a dignified silence, conscious of 
the rectitude of her judicial proceed- 
ings, and trusting to the imperishable 
official record to vindicate her from 
unofficial and irresponsible assailants. 

From the Pittsburg Leader^ I ex- 
tract the following, as a fair sample 
of the editorials in behalf of Frank: 

Few individual cases have attracted the 
•attention and dravs^n the sympatliy of the 

country as that of Leo Frank, under sen- 
tence of death in Georgia. No case has 
become so c'elebrated for the same 
reason — that a man was convicted in 
advance of Ills trial, and that the trial 
itself was a travesty. 

The country has been convinced that 
Franlc is a victim of extraordinary preju- 
dice. It takes unusual prejudice to make 
a man's life the price of its payment. 
This is a point wliicli has remained hid- 
den in all the reviews of the case since 
his conviction. 

In all the proceedings that have been 
taken by Frank's attorneys, and in all 
the reviews of the case, the evidence 
upon which he has been sentenced to 
death has not once been touched. 

Technical points have been passed 
upon, but not once before any court was 
the question of evidence discussed. * 

The various courts took up and passed 
upon every other point but the one most 
vital to Frank — that the evidence to con- 
vict was lacking. 

If you have paid any attention to 
what I have already written, you 
know how shamefully false was the 
statement made in the Leader. 

The editorial continues: 

Except in one little spot in Georgia, Leo 
Frank is looked upon as a victim of preju- 
dice, mob law, and perversion of the legal 

Governor Slaton has taken up the ap- 
plication for executive clemenc'y, and 
promises to virtually re-try the case. He 
has become impressed by the nation-wide, 
human protest against Frank's martyr- 
dom, no less than the seriousness of the 
charges against the name of his State. 

The Governor is receiving an endless 
string of letters from men and women 
all over the country asking him to either 
pardon or commute the sentence; so he 
may have a chance to establish his inno- 
cence later.. 

The individual letters to Governor Sla- 
ton have been strengthened by chain let- 
ters which are rolling across the country. 
Letter chains have been formed every- 
wliere, and are moving like an avalanche 
toward the Governor's office in Georgia. 

No better c'ause than this, the life of a 
man condemned to die, branded as a 
criminal because a mob demanded blood, 
ever enlisted the energies and sympathy 
of the American people. 



The only hope for Frank is that the 
public's attitude make enough impression 
upon Governor Slaton to convince him 
that the case should be re-tried or its 
victim set free. 

Governor Slaton is intensely interested 
from the first, and never defended, even 
frm the first, and never defended, even 
by the Georgia mob, tJiat there was no 
evidence to convict any man except one 
piclced oat for an application of legal 
lynch law. 

Let every humane man and woman in 
America write a letter to Governor Sla- 
ton. Make up chain letters to convinc^e 
him that the guilt of Leo Frank is ac- 
cepted only by a handful of men in one 
town in Georgia who want liis life in a 
spirit of blood-lust prejudice. 

Write today, and tomorrow, and every 
day until Frank is pardoned, his sentence 
commuted or he goes to death, lynched 
by a Georgia mob. 

Write today. 

In addition to these chain-letters, 
men were hired to stand at car-sta- 
tions, in Chicago, and other cities, to 
enroll the name of every passer-by 
who would sign a petition; similar 
petitions were carried from house to 
house, store to store, office to office, 
until even the school children of other 
States were telling us how to manage 
our affairs. 


Perhaps the most astounding piece 
of impudence was "that of William 
Randolph Hearst — partner of Frank's 
people in the moving picture busi- 

He sent to Georgia his personal 
attorney, Clarence Shearn (of Jerusa- 
lem), who happens to be — ^by the 
grace of Hearst — a member of the 
Supreme Court of the State of l^ew 

When William Randolph Hearst 
whistled for his little Supreme 
Court Judge, Shearn should have 
begged permission to remind his 
master, that although he had re- 
sponded to his master's voice, it would 
not look well for one member of the 

Supreme Court of New York to 
invade a friendly State, review a 
decision of her Supreme Court, and 
overrule it — without notice to that 
august tribunal, and without allow- 
ing it to be heard in its own defense. 
However, this is what Shearn 
actually did, as related proudly, by 

New York, June 10, 1915. 
Dear Mr. Hearst: 

I went to Atlanta, as requested by yon, 

for the purpose of making a careful exam- 
ination into the case of Leo Frank, from 
the impartial standpoint of a lewyer who. 
previously knew nothing about the facts 
of the case. Supplementing my full oral 
report to you, I state herewith, for the 
purpose of future reference, the result 
of my investigation. 

In order to arrive at a conclusion based 
solely upon the evidence, and before dis- 
cussing the case with any person, I read 
the printed record containing the evi- 
dence introduc^ed upon Frank's tr'al, and 
the argument to the jury made by State 
Solicitor Dorsey; I also read the State's 
brief on appeal, so as to be fully apprised 
of everything that the State claimed to 
have established against Frank. 

My deliberate judgment, based solely 
ui>on the record, and formed as a judge 
would reach a conclusion in passing upon 
it on api>eal, is that not only did the 
prosecution fail to prove Frank to be 
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but 
that, outside of the incredible and inter- 
ested testimony of the suspected negro, 
Conley, an admitted accomplice, there is 
no legal evidence what«ver in the case 
upon which even a reasonable hypothesis 
of Frank's guilt may be based. The irre- 
sistible conclusion to be reached on the 
evidenc'e in the record is not only that 
Frank is innocent, but that the negro is 

After this examination of the record I 
interviewed and cross-examined Frank in 
the penitentiary for an hour or more. I 
then visited the factory where the crime 
was committed, and carefully examined 
all parts of the premises involved in the 
crime which were mentioned or referred 
to in the testimony. This resulted in 
confirming the conclusion that I had: 
reached on reading the record. 
Yours sincerely, 



It is safe to say that no State in 
the Union, and no independent king- 
dom in the world, was ever before 
subjected to such an indignity. It is 
on a small scale, but it is a gross in- 
dignity, nevertheless. 

Austria demanded of Servia the 
right to send her judges to try the 
Servian assassin of the Archduke 
Ferdinand, and Servia's refusal pre- 
cipitated the European war. Arguing 
from example, Hearst and Shearn 
believe that Servia should have 
granted Austria's demand! 

Shearn's opinion bears the same 
date as Hearst's private appeal to 
Governor Slaton, which appeal was 
not published in Georgia at all, and 
was not given out in the North and 
West until June 23rd, three days after 
the sentence was commuted. In that 
private appeal, Mr. Hearst says: 

Frank was convicted on the testimony 
of the negro Conley. There were only 
two men that could have committed the 
murder, both of these men being in the 
building at the time of her death. Either 
Frank must have committed the murder 
or the negro must have committed the 
murder, so that the testimony of the 
negro, which inculpated Frank, excul- 
pated himself. 

Ought any man to be sent to his death 
on the testimony of a criminal, an ex- 
convict, a confessed accomplice, a proven 
perjurer, and one who would himself 
necessarily be convicted as the mui-derer, 
unless he could succeed in fastening the 
crinio upon another? 

Now, then, is there any other evi- 
dence in this case which would tend to 
convict Frank, any sufficient evidence of 
any kind or character to corroborate the 
statements of this criminal, this proven 
perjurer aJid this vitally interested negro? 

I have made as careful study of the 
case as I can as a layman, and I am 
absolutely convinced that there is no 
such evidence, but my opinion as a lay- 
man on this point may not be of any 
special value. 

However, I have at hand to sustain my 
opinion on this matter the opinion of one 
of the ablest la^vj'ers and jurists in the 
State of New York. 

This ablest, not only of lawyers, but 
of jurists, was the little man from 
Jerusalem — Clarence J. Shearn. 

Now, as I have already shown you, 
the State, at the time of Conley's 
confession, had no evidence on him, 
but did seem to have some on Newt 
Lee. And if Conley had not given 
away the joint guilt of himself and 
the Jew, the busy persons who 
forged the time slip and bloodied the 
old shirt, would have manufactured 
additional evidence against a per- 
fectly innocent man. 

The overshadowing fact in the case 
is coldly ignored by Shearn and 
Hearst, towit — the fact that, if one of 
these two men — Frank and Conley — 
is guilty^ the other is. 

If Hearst and Slaton had not 
both believed Frank to be guilty, 
they would never have stultified them- 
selves by coupling innocence with life- 
imprisonment. Innocence deserves a 
pardon. Either this man committed a 
crime which forfeits his neck, or he 
is entitled to go unpunished. There 
is no middle ground. 

Mr. Hearst is many times a million- 
aire, and he publishes numerous papers 
and magazines: if the official record 
fails to demonstrate Frank's guilt, 
Mr. Hearst would have published that 
record. To have done so, would have 
cost less money than to send Messrs. 
Brisbane and Shearn to Atlanta— and 
it would have looked better. 


As every lawyer knows, our statutes, 
constitutional clauses, and rules of 
practice are built upon the broad 
foundation of the laws of England. 
Without a study of the jurisprudence 
of the Mother Country, we cannot 
understand the true origin, scope and 
purpose of our own legal system. 

Let any member of the profession 
turn to his Blackstone, Book IV., 



Chapter XXXI., and refresh his 
memory as to the pardoning power. 

All crimes in England were sup- 
posed to be committed against the 
King — who was assumed to be pres- 
ent, all the time, in his courts. The 

The King never set aside verdicts 
and overruled his judges. Such a 
thing was inconceivable. 

Blackstone expressly says that it 
would be against all correct principles, 
to allow the power of judging and of 


crime having been committed against 'pardoning to vest in the same person. 

the King, it was his royal prerogative Blackstone quotes the great legist, 

to forgive it. Montesquieu, who lays down the pro- 

The King never re-tried a case ! f oundly wise proposition, that if a 

Such a thing was preposterous. magistrate exercised both the power 



to judge and to pardon, such a com- 
bination of separate powers "would 
tend to confound all ideas of right 
among the mass of the people; as they 
would find it difficult to tell whether 
a prisoner was discharged hy his inno- 
THROUGH favor:' 

Chancellor Kent, in his Commen- 
taries (Vol. I., Part II., par. 283), 
says, "Policy would sometimes require 
a remission of punishment for a crime 
certainly ascertained. The very notion 
of mercy implies the accuracy of the 
claims of justice." 

In none of the authorities can you 
find support for the idea that the 
Executive has power to retry, and to 
pardon, because, on this re-trial, he 
reaches a different conclusion from 
that reached by the jury, on the same 
evidence. For an Executive to exer- 
cise the functions of trial judge and 
traverse jury, is to confound all prin- 
ciples of separate powers, and to bring 
administrative anarchy upon the State. 

Now, when the pardoning power 
was written into our Constitution, 
along with the explicit separation of 
the right to try (judicial) and the 
right to extend mercy (executive), 
such lawyers as Jenkins, Eeese, Mat- 
thews, Pierce, and Toombs never 
dreamed that any sane man would 
contend that the pardoning power in 
Georgia took a new, radical, and 
chaotic departure from the Laws of 

When the Constitution of 1877 gave 
the pardoning power to the Governor, 
it also put him upon notice that he 
must not exercise the power without 
a reason, which he must communicate 
to the Legislature. 

The two constitutional clauses must 
be construed together; and when so 
construed, in the light of English law 
and practise, they mean, that the Gov- 
ernor's reasons for executive clem- 
ency must be such as the Legislature 
will approve; and such as will show 

to the people that he did not act 
capriciously, did not arrogate to him- 
self the right to set aside the verdict, 
and did not usurp the functions of a 
Supreme Court of review. 

The prohibition of judicial powers 
to the Governor, meant, that the 
executive must act upon something 
which occurred after the courts got 
through with the case; or upon some 
mitigating circumstance which tem- 
pered justice and softened the punish- 
ment of the guilty. 

The Constitution never meant that 
a Governor could say, "/ have re-tried 
this case, and return a verdict of Not 

Nor did the Constitution ever mean, 
that the Governor should say — ■ 

"/ have re-tried this case, and find 
a reasonable doubt.'''' 

The Supreme Court can say that, 
but the Governor cannot. 

The Supreme Court has often said 
that; but no Governor ever said it, 
until Eosser's partner got hold of one 
end of the Frank case. 



Consider how differently Governor 
Slton acted in the case of Nick Wil- 
burn, of Jones County, last year. 

Nick Wilburn had grown up^ in the 
backwoods, was a mere common clod- 
hopper, never went to Cornell Col- 
lege, and never had girls under him 
working for five dollars a week. The 
Devil, in the shape of a woman, 
tempted him to eat the forbidden 
fruit, and he did eat. His sin was a 
grievous one, and grievously he paid 
for it. 

Governor Slaton refused to com- 
mute Wilburn's sentence, and in de- 
clining to do so, said: 

"Twenty-three grand jurors, twelve 
petit jurors, a judge of the Supreme 
Court, six judges of the Supreme Court, 
three Prison Commissioners, all under 



oath, have declared the guilt of Nick Wil- 
burn, and that the extreme penalty of 
the law should be imposed. 

"I am sworn to uphold the law, and 
enforce it. I sympathize with the family 
and friends of the defendant. It is a 
great pity that punishment cannot be 
limited to the offender. 

*'If I commuted the sentence in this 
case, it would be equivalent to repealing 
the section of the Code which provides 
for capital punishment. It is not in ray 
province to make laws, but to enforce 

"The responsibility for the verdict is 
not upon me, but the responsibility would 
rest upon me, if I interferred with the 
decrees of a judicial tiibunal without 
good cause." 

What caused the change to come 
over the spirit of Slaton's dream, be- 
tween June, 1914, when poor Nick 
Wilburn swung, and June, 1915, when 
Leo Frank was slipped away from 
Atlanta in a Pullman Palace Car? 


In the Chicago Daily Tribune, the 
fugitive ex-Governor of Georgia said, 
on July 10, 1915 : 

"They said / am afraid to allow a 
man to hang. This is untrue. 

"I allowed a boy of only eighteen 
years to go to the gallows." 

The Georgia boy whose death on 
the sca'ffold is cited by Slaton as a 
proof of his courage, had never been 
in the habit of debauching $o-a-week 
work girls, nor had he ever been seen 
to commit the crime of Sodom, nor 
did he rape and murder a little girl 
who ought to have been at school. 

Therefore, Mr. Hearst did not send 
Clarence Shearn to Atlanta, to reverse 
the Supreme Court of Georgia in that 
case. Doctors C. B. Wilmer and Jake 
White did not ascend the Throne of 
Grace in behalf of just a plain, com- 
mon, unromantic Georgia lad. who 
had killed a man. 

It required all the peculiar horror, 
loathsomeness, and atrocity of the Leo 

Frank case, to arouse that morbid in- 
terest — that weird fascination exerted 
by the crimes and criminals that are 
abnormally hideous — to influence the 
sensational Hearst, to enthuse Mary 
Delaney Fisher, to capture the Doc- 
tors of Divinity, and to set idiots to 
signing petitions. 

In that case, also, the older of the 
criminals, Jim Cantrell, had been 
lured by a wicked woman, and he fell 
into her toils. Bartow Cantrell was 
a 17-year-old boy. He was wholly 
under the influence of his elder 
brother, and he had probably always 
done as Jim bade him. 

At any rate, he took part in the 
murder, not on his own initiative, and 
not for his own purposes, but at the 
instigation of Jim Cantrell and Mrs. 
Hawkins, the woman in the case. 

The Cantrells were brought up in 
sordid surroundings, and discreditable 
conditions. In the midst of civiliza- 
tion, they were left untouched by the 
ennobling influences of Church and 
State. In the midst of Christianity, 
a Bible was never put in their hands, 
until both the Church and the State 
said to them, '"''Prepare to meet your 


In refusing to commute, in the Can- 
trell case, Slaton wrote: 

Under my oath I must uphold the law. 

It is not my province to make laws, but 
to execute them. If the people do not 
believe in capital punishment, it is the 
duty of their representatives to repeal the 
law which provides for it. 

The appeals that have been made for. 
clemency by good men and women are 
the promptings of kind hearts and sympa- 
thetic natures. Oftentimes apparent 
severity is really philanthropy, and the 
enforcement of the law in this case may 
be the protection of many an honest fire- 
side in Georgia, and may afford secfurity 
to many an honest hu^and. 

The majesty of the law must be vindi- 
cated, and those whose kindly impulses 
urge them now to request clemency will 



in their more thoughtful moments recog- 
nize the necessity for law enforcement as 
a protection to the civilization of our 

For the reasons stated, 1' cannot inter- 
fere, unless at the same time I am bill- 
ing to make the declaration that, while 
Governor, the law of capital punishment 
shall be i*epealed. This I am forbidden 
to do by my oath of office. 

This July 30, 1914. 



whom a motherless daughter of thir- 
teen years was dependent for a sup- 

But Slaton felt no pity; he devoted 
no anxious days and nights to the 
study of that case: he made no mys- 
terious visits to New York while that 
case was pending: and he had nothing 
to say against circumstantial evidence, 



In September, 1914, there was an 
effort to save the neck of an old 
Georgian, made by some people who 
had little money, and no organization^ 
and no subsidized daily papers, no 
Doctors of Divinity, and no Hearst- 
Ochs-Pulitzer-Straus combine, and no 
champions among the snobs who are 
Slaton's ''best people." 

The old man was named Umphrey, 
and he was nothing but a tenant 
farmer. He was convicted, on purely 
circumstantial evidence,^ of having 
killed his landlord. He was sentenced 
to death ; and there were a few gener 
ous Georgians, in and around Dalton, 
who took pity on the old man — upon 

His snobbish soul could see nothing 
to appeal to him in the case of a con- 
demned man who would not look 
nicely in the parlor "of a Peachtree 
palace, or in the elegant quarters of 
an Atlanta Locker Club. 

In the Umphrey case, there were 
no unscrupulous lawyers so highly 
paid that they forged a letter of a 
dead Judge, to use it before a Gover- 
nor who must have known it was 

Who cared for the old tenant? 

He had no monej^: he had few 
friends, and these few had no more 
money than himself. 

Hang him! Hang him on circum- 
stantial evidence! Hang him, and 
leave his little ffirl to the cold mercies 



of the world — a Avorlfl in which she 
can do what Mary Phagan did, work 
where Mary Phagan worked, and fall 
a victim to some rich employer's lusts^ 
as Mary did ! 

And they hanged him, nine months 
before Slaton repealed the law of cap- 
ital punishment, abolished the jury 
system, obliterated two Supreme 
Courts, and rode into Fame on a pre- 
tended mistake of law, and a forged 
letter of Judge Koan. 

When Slaton told the New Yorkers 
that he meant to retry Leo Frank, 
and when he kept his word to those 
millionaire New Yorkers by going 
through all the evidence, visiting the 
factory, experimenting with the ele- 
vator, and listening to the most elab- 
orate arguments on the details of the 
record, he cut lose from the laws of 
England, cut loose from the estab- 
lished practice of centuries, cut loose 
from the Constitution he swore to 
support, cut loose from the anchorage 
of honor — and flung himself upon the 
shoreless Sea of Shame. 

The maddening thing to the people 
of Georgia, is, not that one man's life 
has been spared, but that Jew Money 
has dene for a foul Sodomite and 
murderer, a thing that shatters all 
precedents, nullifies the highest law, 
sinks juries and courts into contempt, 
brings upon us a sickening conscious- 
ness that our public men and our 
newspapers are for sale, weakens the 
defenses of every poor man's home, 
and adds to the perils that beset every 
poor man's child. 

Ah, it is a sad day for Georgia ! 
At last we know that a poor man's 
home, and a poor man's child, counts 
for nothing when Big Money starts 
out to muzzle the papers, libel the 
State, invent a case which does not 
exist, hide the case that does exist, 
and defeat the Law as laid down by 
the greatest tribunal in the world. 

Woe to the State, in which the poor 
man has just cause to ask — "Where 

is my protection? Where is the 
strong arm that should be my sword . 
and shield? 

"Where can I put my child to work, 
and feel that she is safe? 

What has become of my rights, my 
safeguards, my dependence Upon Jus- 

Woe to the State! when the poor 
man has just cause to say — 

"/ am nothing! They only show 
me consideration when they want my 
vote, and when they put a gun in my 
hand to fight out the rich man's quar- 

"/ am nothing! The laws they 
make are against me. The burden of 
life is all mine, and none of the ease 
and enjoyment. 

"/ am nothing! If my boy — my 
boy whom the State neglected — com- 
mits a crime, he swings for it; hut if 
some rich man's son lusts after my 
daughter^ lays in wait for her, leads 
her into a trap, assaults her^ and hills 
her — I am asked to respect the Law, 
while the Law is hiring autoiflobiles 
and parlor cars to take her vile de- 
stroyer into a fake imprisonment I" 


It was generally believed that the 
Frankites had won over two members 
of the Prison Commission. When it 
became known that E. E. Davison 
had disappointed them, and that Pat- 
terson alone had voted for commuta- 
tion, the Frankites were uneasy. They 
had failed in every court, had failed 
before the Commission, and were left 
with a Governor who was known to 
be a most uncertain quantity. It be- 
came an tirgent necessity for some 
strong Frankite to see Slaton at once, 
and brace him up. 

Rosser to the rescue! 

The case was on its last legs, and 
between New York and Atlanta rich 



Jews wailed lamentably, during the 
few hours before Eosser got hold of 
his tricky partner. These two noble 
men loved the darkness at that time, 
for reasons that have always been 
considered sufficient. So, the noble 
Rosser went up a back street in his 
automobile, late at nighty stopped it a 
block or two away from the Gover- 
nor's; and footed it through the alley, 
like an impecunious person who de- 

ton's hypocrisy and perfidy, but as a 
side-light on events in Atlanta: 

Atlanta, June 22. 
Mr. Tom Watson: 

What I tell you I know to be true as 
God is light, and it is this: The Jews 
all gathered at the home or the Seligs, on 
Washington Street, where Frank's wife 
and father-in-law live, and from 8 till 12 
o'clock, tliey had a regular old-time 
Belshazzar teast. They drank wine, high 
balls, whiskey and beer, and smoked and 



sired to purloin the portable property 
of an unsuspecting fellow creature. 

Rosser went into the home of Sla- 
ton, and remained for hours, and until 
after midnight. 

What Rosser said to Slaton in 
this clandestine meeting, will never 
be known; but it was noticed that 
next day the lamentations of the 
Jews were replaced by sly grins, 
and offers to bet ten to one that Sla- 
ton would commute! 

Read the following, not as evidence 
of Frank's guilt, or as proof of Sla- 

sang, and had music; and there were not 
less than a hundred and twenty automo- 
biles full of Jews that came there from 
the time I say to the late hour. 

Now, they all knew Slaton had com- 
muted Frank, and were celebrating it. 

And I know a policeman who was on 
the streets yesterday, to make out like 
(Controlling the mob, aid he told me he 
passed the jail every night at J 2 o'clock 
for a year, and going oa duty, and never 
saw a light in the office of the Sheriff till 
Saturday night, and he was surprised to 
see the Sheriff sitting there like he was 
waiting for somebody, and suddenly a 
Jew came running up and tapped on the 
window, and the Sheriff raised the win- 



dow and the Jew whispered to him, and 
the Sheriff smiled, and then the Jew ran 
off and the Sheriff closed the window. 
Now, that showed conspiracy, and tliat 
Slaton wa« working with the Jews all the 

In other words, the Jews knew — 
some on Friday, and some on Satur- 
day — ^that Slaton had commuted the 

Defending his action, Slaton pub- 
lished an article said to contain 15,000 
words, nearly half of them devoted to 
an attack on Conley, and the other 
half to misrepresenting the official testi- 
mony of the white witnesses. He pre- 
tended not to have reached a decision 
in the case until 3 o'clock Sunday 
morning. It was said that he signed 
the commutation a minute after the 
midnight of Sunday. 

When it became known that the 
Governor had actually re-tried the 

case, on the same old evidence that 
had been so often, and so thoroughly 
threshed out in the courts, the State 
seethed with indignation. 

It was felt that Slaton had usurped 
an authority not vested in him by 
the Constitution, and that he had 
established the principle of. One law 
for the Rich, and another for the 

In the Wilburn case, he laid down 
the law correctly: in the Cantrell case, 
while he was hard as adamant, he was 
right as to the rigorous letter of the 
law ; in the Frank case he reversed him- 
self at the same time that he reversed 
all the Courts. Why the difference? 
There is but one answer: in the cases 
of Wilburn, Cantrell, and Umphrey, 
he was not of counsel for the accused, 



If a Giant Cut the Wires 

Suppose all telephones were silent, 
and that for forty-eight hours you 
could not even call a telephone ex- 
change anywhere in the Bell System 
to ask what the trouble was! 

Imagine the confusion which would 
prevail — with personal visits and mes- 
sengers substituted for direct, instant 
communication; with sidewalks, street 
cars and elevators jammed; with every 
old-fashioned means of communica- 
tion pressed into service and all of them 
combined unable to carry the load. 

The instant contact of merchantwith 
customer, of physician with patient, of 
friend with friend, would be severed; 
the business man and the housewife 
would lose the minutes and hours the 
telephone saves them. The economic 
loss w^ould be incalculable. 

American Telephone an 

There would not be time enough 
to do the things we are accustomed 
to do, and social as well as business 
life would be paralyzed. 

Such a condition is almost incon- 
ceivable. The Bell System has devel- 
oped telephone service to the highest 
degree of usefulness and made it so 
reliable that its availability is never 
questioned. It has connected cities, 
towns and the remotest places from 
coast to coast, and has taught the 
people the advantages of nation-wide 
telephone facilities. 

Plans are made, buildings built and 
businesses run with Bell Service taken 
for granted, and yet we have to imagine 
what it would mean to be entirely with- 
out telephones before the great value 
of this ever-present service can really 
be appreciated. 

D Telegraph Company 

One Policy 

And Associated Companies 

One System 

Universal Service 



Leo Frank is now at the State 
Farm, an honored giiest of the mana- 
gers, awaiting his triumphant release 
from even the politely formal fetters 
of the Law. 

His little victim, whose upraised 
hands — fixed by the rigor mortis — 
proved that she had died fighting for 
her virtue, lies in Georgia's soil, amid 
a grief-stricken, and mortified people 
— a people bowed down by the unut- 
terable humiliation of having been 
sold out to Jew money. 

On the heights from which the 
immortals look into the lives of 
human beings, how vast must seem the 
moral distance between the little girl, 
who died, rather than soil the pur- 
ity that God gave her, and the Gov- 
ernor, who brought this eternal dis- 
grace upon himself and our State! 

A child died a heroine's death, and 
sleeps in a heroine's grave: the tnan 
is pilloried in eternal infamy. 

^Ve gave him, a clean commission; 
and he returned it to us, covered toith 

The Constitution which he swore to 
respect, he trampled into the mud. 

The great Seal of State went, 
to do for an unscrupulous law firm, a 
deed of darkness which dared not face 
the sun. 

We have been betrayed! The breath 
of some leprous monster has passed 
over us, and we feel like crying out, 
in horror and despair, 
'Tnclean! UNCLEANr 
"When John M. Slaton tosses on a 
sleepless bed, in the years to come, he 
will see a A'ivid picture of that little 
Georgia girl, decoyed to the metal 
room by this satyr-faced Jew: he will 
see her little hands put out, to keep 
off the lustful beast: he will hear her 
cry of sudden terror: he will see her 
face purpling as the cruel cord chokes 
her to death — and John M Slaton will 
walk the floor, a icretched., conscience- 

smiten man, AND HE WILL 

Many, many years ago, there was a 
sermon preached at Thomson, by a 
man whose life was as pure as crystal, 
and who, now and then, was lifted 
into a simple eloquence that moved all 
who listened. John M. White was his 
name — peace to his soul, for he is 
dead, and I loved him well. 

He was speaking of Duty, of the 
higher path, and the old land-marks; 
of the honor that a man should guard,, 
as a woman guards her virtue. 

He told of the little ermine of the 
far North, the tiny creature of. the 
snows, the unsullied Diana of the 
silent woods, so true to its instinct for 
purity, so loyal to the white drapery 
that God had put upon it — that the 
hunters, seeking its life for its price- 
less fur, smeared filth around the 
burrow \vhere the dainty thing lived; 
and how this little dumb brute^ 
shrinking from a vile contact which 
would soil its spotless covering, fell 
into the hands of its enemies — pre- 
ferring death to contamination. 

Are the old lessons lifeless? Are 
the old glories gone'^ Are there no 
feet that tread the old paths? 

Once, there were men in Georgia — 
men who were afraid' of nothing, save- 
to do wrong; men who sprang to 
arms, and went to death, on a bare 
question of principle; men who would 
no more lie than they would steal ; . 
men who flamed into passionate indig- 
nation when a legislature was believed 
to have disgraced the State; men who 
caught the fire from the heavens ta 
burn a law which outraged Georgia's 
sense of honor and justice. 

The sons of these men carried the 
Grey lines, and the tattered Stars and 
Bars farthest up the heights of Get- 
tysburg; met the first shock of battle 
at Manassas; led the last charge at 



And the sons of these Georgians are 
today bowed down with unspeakable 
grief — for thev feel that our grand 
old Empire ' State HAS BEEN 

Like the Roman w'ife of old, we feel 
that something foul, something un- 
utterably' loathsome has crept to bed 
with us, and polluted us during the 
night : and that, while the morning 
has come, it can never restore our 

We have been violated, AND WE 

Note: Win. J. Burns has stated 
that he ivas employed hy the State of 
Georgia, worked on the case a week, 
and reported that there was no evi- 
dence against Leo Frank. 

Bums was never connected with the 
■case at all, until after our Supreme 
Court had carefully reviewed the evi- 

dence against Frank, and declared it 
amply sufficient to show his guilt. 

Burns was never employed in any 
capacity hy the State of Georgia. 

Second: Governor Slaton has told 
it all over the North and West, that 
Judge Roan requested a commutation 
of FranWs sentence. 

This statement is false. Judge Roan 
continued to say, notahly to his pastor 
and his daughter, that the evidence 
unquestionably demonstrated Franks 
'guilt; and not until Judge Roan had 
been dead more than two months, was 
a forged letter presented, which stul- 
tified Judge Roan's record, and con- 
tradicted his judicial declarations, of 
record in this case. 


Your choice of i locating 
instruments (free). Sim- 
ply pay after first find. 

Circulars 10c. Address, Ideal Novelty Co., Dept. E. 

P. O. Box 738, Chicago, ni. 



Two Recent Additions to the Roman Cath- 
olic Hi^orical Series of 


''The Ifalian Pope's Campaign Against f/?e Con- 
stitutional Riglits of American Citizens/* 

Pamphlet, 14 pages, well printed, clear type ; postpaid, 10c. 

''What Goes On in f/?e Nunneries ?" 

Pamphlet, well printed, illustrated, 1 1 pages ; postpaid, 10c. 

Where it is desired to circulate these pamphlets, special prices w II be made. 

«Jeffersonian F^ublisliing Company 

Xtiomson, Ga. 


A Thorough Study 
of Foreign Missions 

This is a most important subject. It involves 
questions of statesmanship, as well as religion. 

The Roman Catholics are enco uraging Protestants 
to c oncentrate their attention on fore ign countries, 
whi le the Roman ists are concen trating on the United 

The Protestants are walking right into the trap. 

Mr. Watson is appealing to Protestant churches 
to save America from the wolves of Rome. 

His book contains 158 pages. 

It is beautifully printed, on excellent paper. 

It is profusely illustrated. 

The price is 30 cents. We send it post-paid. 






THOS. E. WATSON, Editor 

One Dollar a Year 

In Clubs of Ten, Fifty Cents 

Send For Sample Copy 

A Magnificent Advertising 



THOS. E. WATSON, Editor 


In Clubs of TEN, Money AcGompanying Order, 
Per Year, Each, 50 Cents 







Sold:in France as the Best One-Volume 

Life of the Emperor, and Regarded as 

a Standard, by Eminent Scholars 

Bound in Cloth, 

Illustrated, Best Paper 

and Typographical Appearance 


PRICE $1.50